 started. Thanks. Good morning. This is a convenient message. It's gamification public meeting. We're holding it virtually, so I will do a roll call. Good morning again, Commissioner O'Brien. Good morning. I'm here. Mr. Hill, good morning. Good morning. I'm here. Risha Skinner. Good morning. Risha Maynard. Good morning. I'm here. Alright, so we'll get started. Again, for those of you who are coming on for this public meeting, we just met for two hours beforehand with another applicant, so we're a couple minutes late, forgive us. We just need a quick little break, but we are convening today's public meeting number 422 on January 11th, and this is a convening of a meeting where we will be evaluating another applicant seeking a category 3 untethered sports wagering online license, and that today we now have before us Browns, M.A. Dainey, LLC, known as Drapkinks. So today the session will begin with your presentation and hopefully a demonstration. And what I would ask, if you wouldn't mind, is to introduce yourselves. As you go along, I do have a list of all who are going to be here, but I'm going to let you really manage that for me. So thank you, Mr. Roberts. Thank you. And good morning, Chair Judd Stein, Commissioner O'Brien, Commissioner Hill, Commissioner Skinner and Commissioner Maynard. My name is Chris Topola. I'm the Senior Director of Government Affairs at Drapkinks, and it is an honor to appear before you again today in connection with Crown M.A. Gaming LLC, Doing Businesses Drapkinks, application for a category 3 untethered sports wagering operator license. As a Massachusetts based company, in fact, many of us today will be speaking to you from our global headquarters in Boston's Back Bay neighborhood. We are excited to possibility of bringing our leading mobile sports book home to the Commonwealth. At this time, our co-founder, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman Jason Robbins, who is currently abroad and joining us remotely, would appreciate the opportunity to address the commission and provide a brief opening remark prior to our presentation and product demonstration. With that, I'll turn it over to Jason. Thank you, Chris. And thank you, excuse me, Chair Judd Stein, Commissioner O'Brien, Commissioner Hill, Commissioner Skinner and Commissioner Maynard for your time today. We're excited to walk you through Drapkinks and our commitment to Massachusetts. I'm Jason Robbins, as Chris mentioned, and the co-founder, CEO and Chairman of the Board at Drapkinks. Our team are going to take you through the presentation in detail, but I wanted to take this opportunity to speak with you briefly about our relationship with and commitment to the Commonwealth, a little bit about who we are as a business. As you're likely aware, Drapkinks is unique among all applicants in that we are a homegrown, Massachusetts company. It was in the spare bedroom, I co-founder Paul Lieberman's house in Watertown, Massachusetts, myself, Paul and Matt Kalish spent countless evenings and weekends sketching out the plan for our daily fantasy sports startup. In the decade since we launched Drapkinks, we have grown from a local Massachusetts startup into a truly global, multivertical gaming company and entertainment company. We went public in 2020. We have more than 5,000 global employees with offices in several major US metro markets in four international countries. We offer online sports spending in 20 states plus Ontario, and Drapkinks brand has become synonymous with sports in America. But in many ways, we're still a local company. We remain headquartered in Boston. We're still a founder-led company, and all three of us live in Massachusetts. We have more than more employees in Massachusetts than any other location. Drapkinks employees call more than 150 cities and towns across the Commonwealth home, touching every region of our home state. And we know how to pronounce the names of all those cities and towns, Gloucester, Haverhill, Situate, and Worcester, right down the list. We made the decision early to make Massachusetts Drapkinks home because it checked every box for us. There's an endless pipeline of talent driven by the Commonwealth's world-class colleges and universities. There's a savvy and supportive venture community, many of which have helped fund Drapkinks, an innovation ecosystem that spurs boundless ambition and next generation thinking. Municipal and state government are partners to tech companies. We've learned that firsthand. Massachusetts isn't just a great place to start a business, it's a great place to put down roots and start a family too. And Massachusetts, of course, has an incredible sports tradition and the world's most passionate sports fans. One of my children's favorite activities is to go to games with their mommy and daddy to cheer on their favorite sports teams. And I don't just mean the professional teams. I have seen my kids cheer every bit as loudly for the Harvard women's basketball team when I took them to a game last season as they do watching the Patriots at Chilat. We're proud to call Massachusetts home and I believe our company's culture and values reflect our home state. As a technology company at our core, Drapkinks believes the best innovation comes from diverse perspectives, thoughts, beliefs, ideas and experiences. We consistently push boundaries and challenge convention to ensure our culture and products reflect the expectations of our employees and the customers we serve. We believe in promoting diversity and providing opportunities for everyone to explore identities, cultures and communities through stories, discussions, traditions and languages. Outside of their own. We believe this focus is key to our competitive advantage and is a differentiating characteristic that helps us attract the best talent. We understand that creating a workplace that fosters inclusion and welcomes diversity is an ever evolving process. We've committed at least $1 million annually to accelerate our inclusion, equity and belonging philosophy. And we're seeking out diverse talent through partnerships with cura labs and resilient coders. We also recognize the importance of operating responsibly. Drapkinks systems based approach to responsible gaming leverages technology, employee training, evidence based research, collaboration and affiliation with third parties and comprehensive education to promote safer play. Our vision is to build a best in class RG program used with innovation informed by the latest evidence base. Through our state council funding program, Drapkinks is the first and only gaming operator to offer funding $1.5 million in total to all state problem gaming gambling councils funding, including the Massachusetts Council on Gaming and Health, regardless of whether we offer products in the state. This commitment to responsible play isn't new for Drapkinks. Our relationship with the world renowned Cambridge Health Alliance, the division on addiction began years before we even launched sports betting. We have maintained an ongoing contractual agreement or rely on their evidence based expertise to help guide and advise in all aspects of our responsible gaming program. We're thrilled to be at this point and I'm excited for you to learn more about Drapkinks, our sports betting expertise, our responsible gaming program, our commitment to inclusion, equity and belonging and the potential for us to make a real positive impact in common wealth. I'm excited that you'll get to hear directly from a group of amazing leaders at Drapkinks presenting today, while now introduced as well as a host of subject matter experts available to answer your questions. First person I'll introduce is my co-founder and current president of global technology and product Paul Lieberman. Second, Jason Park, our chief financial officer. Third, Graham Walters, our chief people officer. Fourth, Stephanie Sherman, our chief marketing officer. Fifth, Chrissy Thurmond, our senior director of responsible gaming. And last but not least, Jeremy McCauley, our director of product. I will now turn it back over to Chris Sepola, commissioners. Thank you so much for your hard work in bringing sports measuring to the commonwealth and we look forward to the conversation. Thank you, Jason. And before we begin our presentation, I would like to note two items for the commission. Several parts of the Crown MA gaming LLC application have been designated as confidential as contemplated in chapter 23 N of the Massachusetts General Laws. We ask that discussion of any materials that have been designated as confidential be done through an executive session. As such, we do not plan to present any information that is confidential in our affirmative presentation. And we will alert the commission if a question asked by the commission elicits confidential information. And at that time, we will request that we move into an executive session. Further, certain statements we make during this presentation may constitute forward looking statements that are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause our actual results to differ materially from our historical results or from our forecasts. Presenters today will also discuss some non gap financial measures that we believe may be useful in evaluating draftings operating performance. We would refer you to slide two of our presentation for important information regarding reliance on the limitations of forward looking statements and non gap financial measures. With that, I'll now turn the presentation over to draft Kings co founder and president of global technology and product Paul Lieberman. Thank you, Chris. And thank you, everyone. I couldn't be more excited to be having this conversation about our home state of Massachusetts. So if we can go to the next slide. So just a little bit of background and Jason has shared, you know, a lot of the, a lot of the details, but draft Kings launched a little bit over 10 years ago in my spare bedroom in Watertown, Massachusetts, as a daily fantasy sports company with me, Matt and Jason sitting there working tirelessly to get this product up. We quickly moved to the back bay and have kept Boston and Massachusetts as our home ever since we focus primarily for the first six years on a daily fantasy sports, but in 2018 with the U.S. Supreme Court overturning the men on sports betting, we were the very first to launch a sports book app in the U.S. online outside of Nevada on August 1st of 2018. That was a really proud moment. We leverage our technology expertise, our marketing, our analytics to be the first ones to be the first ones live over the last four years. We have launched in over 20 jurisdictions and have gotten over 23 sports, but sports betting licenses. We now have 4,000 employees and over 2.7 million monthly players and 22 million lifetime registrations. If you can go to the next slide right now, our total global footprint is 11 offices and we have round the clock coverage for both technology as well as customer support, which is 24 7365 and Boston is our global headquarters. Many locations in the U.S. for support, as well as technology offices in Dublin, London, Sofia, Plavdiv, as well as Tel Aviv, where actually I'm also overseas sitting sitting in today visiting the office. So if we can go to the next line. And like I mentioned earlier, we're operating in 20 states, 12 of them retail sports book and 18 properties. And we hold 23 sports book licenses across. We we are the only operator operating in as many states as we operate in right now as well. And thank you. We can go to the next slide. Sorry. Next slide. You might be stuck on slides. Sorry, it is a good slide. And you know what? It's it's actually amazing to look at it after after 10 years just to see the growth across all the different jurisdictions. And if you if you look at DraftKings today, we have 2.7 million monthly players, as I mentioned, we are a vertically integrated online sports book. And what I mean by that is we run all of the technology behind our sports book, everything from the online platform to the all the sports wagering where 100% vertically integrated. We have a retail sports book technology that we've also built in house. We have a large database of DraftKings players in Massachusetts and in the New England area over several hundred thousands. We operate in 46 states. That's daily fantasy sports book and casino. And we have proprietary technology around sports betting and I. We have the leading market presence. So nobody is in as many states as we are. And we've spent a lot of our technology on product innovation, data driven marketing and really making a leading customer experience and, you know, for sports betting. So if we go to the next slide. And finally, you know, most importantly to us is putting the customer first and making a best customer experience. As a matter of fact, that is one of our one of our values in the organization. And the way we do that is by offering all the different service channels, email, chat, phone, social media. We have a thousand plus customer service associates mostly across the US. And we offer 24 7365 availability. The way we also track is making sure that our customers are satisfied with our customer service. We track the service levels, time to resolution and making sure that, you know, ultimately, it's important for customers to have a great experience. And that is the number one thing that we focus on and the number one value at DraftKings. So with that, I'll I'll hand that over back to question. Thank you very much, Paul. Moving on to the next section of the presentation on DraftKings economic impact. We have our chief financial officer, Jason Park. Good morning, Madam Chair, and commissioners. Over the next two to three pages. I'd love to just cover our financial health and our presence in the Commonwealth and Massachusetts of Massachusetts. I believe we're having a little trouble with the slide deck. We just have one second. Apologies. Got it. Perfect. Thank you. Here on page 11, you can see several important topics. First all, from a revenue growth perspective, you can see that we have grown more than 100% in 2020 to 2021. We have not yet announced audited fiscal year 2022 results yet. But if you use Wall Street Consensus Estimates, the expectation is that we will have grown another 68% from 2021 to 2022. And on a go for base basis, again, using Wall Street Consensus Estimates, you can see that the expectation is for greater than 30% annual growth from 2021 through 2025. From a profitability perspective, using adjusted EBITDA as the best measure of profitability, you can see that we are not profitable today because we are still in investment mode in this exciting industry. But as you look into 2022 and beyond again, using Wall Street Consensus Estimates, you can see that the expectation is that 2022 is our deepest loss year with a strong inflection and profitability starting in 2023 and achieving profitability shortly thereafter. Finally, from a cash and liquidity perspective, you can see that we are well capitalized with over 1.2 billion cash to fund operations as we pivot to profitability in short order. On the next page, as Jason mentioned, you can see that our global headquarters is here in the Commonwealth. We have over 1300 employees based in over 150 cities and towns across the Commonwealth. This means that we have been contributing to the economy of the Commonwealth in multiple ways, not only the employment, but also elements such as income taxes, benefits to local businesses, parking and transportation to our back bay office, sales and use taxes, and taxes on our legacy daily fantasy sports product to name a few. On page 13, I'm sure you are keen to understand our projections of our online sports betting product in the Commonwealth. Given that we are a publicly traded company and these estimates may constitute material non-public information, we kindly request that we discuss these projections in private executive session. What I will say is that we have a very strong ability to develop estimates and projections based on existing states and trends we are seeing across the nation and thus have high confidence in our ability to achieve and exceed those expectations. Thank you, Jason. Now moving on to section three of the presentation, diversity, equity and inclusion. Turn the presentation over to our Chief People Officer, Graham Welters. Thank you, Chris. And hello, Madam Chair and commissioners. Excited to present to you today about diversity, equity and inclusion. We know it's not on the slides, but us internally we call it inclusion, equity and belonging. And I think that really starts there the reason why being it's really first and foremost about inclusion and about equity and about belonging at the company. It's not just about demographics. And as you'll see through the slides that I'm going to present, we've taken the time to outline our approach and both in terms of how we're going to continue to make progress in terms of our overall representation, but also in terms of how we want to make sure that each and every employee feels, you know, to this statement here safe, empowered, engaged and champion. And we look at our overall philosophy and we'll see this as it flows throughout the deck. Our objective, our philosophy is to maintain parity and opportunity across the employee lifecycle from hire through retire. And that's how we look at it. We are data driven at our core. And as we look at, you know, DEI, at DraftKings, we look to measure and improve at all points in the employee life cycle. And just like the Mass Gaming Commission has their own working group on DEI reading through that, I think that you also understand that it's systemic. And that's the way we look at it here at DraftKings as well. We're looking at the entire system, not just demographics. So if that we can move ahead to the next slide, our strategy and how we're applying this is really through a four point framework, which is hire, wire, empower and sustain. So we're looking to understand how do we hire? How do we build relationships across the community? How do we make sure that we're looking at not just our overall hiring numbers, but full pipeline and understanding where we're recruiting from and how we can look to increase diversity across our employee base? We look to wire. So we look to leverage our platform as a company, as an employer, align with those values. We look to internally at our own systems to empower our employees to develop and grow and feel like they belong at the company. And then we look to sustain and improve, and that really comes back to, as I said before, the infrastructure, what we're looking at as a company, how do we measure? How do we use data to make data driven decisions across the board and specifically in this area? One other thing just to point out, it's fine, you can leave it. As Jason said before, we're putting our money where our mouth is to, we're investing a million dollars annually in this area internally, and we'll continue to look at how we can invest more as we go forward. Madam Chair, can I interrupt? This is Commissioner Hill. Can we go to the back up to the slide we were on just for another minute or two, please? So I just take some notes. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you. So in terms of leadership, happy to announce, and this was not in our application because she had not yet started, but happy to announce Christina Akkas is our VP of inclusion, equity and belonging. She just started actually this week, but is not really the one very excited to have her and very excited to actually up level the position that was that was here before, but is really representative of the of the fact that we are looking to continue to invest here. And it's a it's more a process of continuing what we have done since 2019. And that was when we hired our first leader for diversity, equity and inclusion at Draft Kings, who made a significant impact and was able to really bring a lot of our systems and programs online, develop our overall philosophy, working with our founders and leadership team and drive change across the organization, a lot of which we'll be talking about today and has put us in a position where we've up leveled that role to hire Christina, who again just joined this week. And I did not want to put a position to have to present everything that we have here today, but it's happy to take any questions as well, but very excited to have her on board, as well as Bianca and Marjorie, who support her and her team. As I was saying before, it's not just about the DEI, the DEI team. It's not just about our HR team. It's about the company as a whole and we're proud that our executive team takes a very active role in this. Many of those who are here today. So Jenna Geer, our Chief Compliance Officer, myself, Matt Kalish and Paul Lieberman, two of our co founders and Steph Sherman, our Chief Marketing Officer, very actively involved here. As we look at demographics and highlights overall, one of the things I just wanted to call out is again, this started for us. The the stats that you see on this page begin with the end of 2018. So December 31st, 2018 and come towards today in 2023. And as with everything, it takes time to make an impact. And what we're excited to show here is the impact that our programs have made across the demographics of this company. You see that when it comes to BIPOC employees, we've been able to more than double representation over the course of this time frame and forge into representation of increased are our female representation by about a third over that same period of time and our overall representation in the U.S. Inclusive of veteran status, LGBTQ plus has increased from for a little over 40 percent to almost 58 percent over that period of time as well. And this is something where again, it's not just about demographics, but it is important to show the representation and the progress we've made over that period of time and that we'll continue to make. This is one of those areas where there will always be a focus. There will always be something to do. There's never, you know, an end date and we'll look to continue to make progress as you'll see at the end of this presentation in the goals that we have in this area. As you look to the next slide, we're also showing a representation in Massachusetts. So our representation in Massachusetts as a whole is 27 percent female, 18 percent BIPOC, 57 percent diverse. We're excited to make an impact and to go live in our home state. I mean, I I went to high school in Braintree. I live in Hanover. I'll be excited when my barber stops asking me when we're going to go live here too. But it's it's important that, you know, that we show the impact that we make here too. I'm one of many, you know, we have employees that live in one hundred fifty cities and towns across the Commonwealth. And we're excited also that over the course of even just this year, we're expecting to add seventy five to eighty five new employees in the Commonwealth as well. Also, as Jason and Paul mentioned as well, this is where a lot of our leadership team is as well with seventy out of one hundred fifteen of our SLT members living in Massachusetts as well. Sorry for that. And enjoying the traffic in the city of Boston. So you'll see I'm going to walk through a bit of what we do, not just where we're at, but also what we do and how we. I want to see that me or others, but suddenly I'm having trouble hearing. Yeah, I am. This volume went down after the horn. After the. There is some construction across from us. I think there's a dump truck that wanted to test out its horn. Can you can you hear me now? No, it's still dropped for some reason, right? That it dropped. And while I can think about that, you can let your barber know that I will be excited to let it hard at work. We're trying to get some tech support in here to help us. I think it's better. Maybe a little bit. Is that improved at all? It did. Yeah, it's back where you are. Much better. OK, excellent. Please, please let me know as I go along or anybody know and we can try and. Whether it's yours or everybody's. So thank you. OK, I appreciate it. So what I was saying was that I was or I was going into a pivot from overall demographics to programmatic efforts and initiatives we have across the organization that align with our overall principles of impact in the overall employee lifecycle. So starting first with our talent acquisition organization, what we've looked to do over the period of time where we've focused really on this over the course of the last four to five years is to take a more data oriented approach and a partnership oriented approach. So we know that as a whole we'll look to make an impact through through our overall funnel and looking to improve the top of funnel like number of applicants and what those demographics look like. And we look to influence those both through the partnerships that we participate in. So things like resilient coders, which is Boston based, but also things like women hack out in tech. Some of the partnerships listed here allows us to expand our internal networks and expand diversity throughout the funnel, which should enable us to get more representative group of applicants throughout our pipeline. We also look to make an impact through our campus programs. And, you know, we do very much focus on local and national colleges and programs throughout throughout the US. We look at HBCUs. We look at and and other college programs where we feel like we have strong cultural alignment. And we also look for opportunities within those schools to align with their diverse networking groups as well. You'll also see here we look through other programs like Ripple Match, which allows us to search for underrepresented groups through campus programs out for undergrad. It's just some some samples of things that we look for. And what we also look for is we look at our at this point, our director level and above. We have an executive recruiting team where we proactively source for talent to build diverse pipelines. And we we've seen that that has made an impact in our overall leadership representation as well. At the bottom of the screen, what you'll also see is why we continue to be optimistic and set aggressive goals for overall representation is that we continue to see that our incoming recruiting classes are more diverse than our existing employee base. And you'll see at the bottom of the screen, all four women and BIPOC that that continues to be the case in 2022. If we can move forward from a talent management perspective, they're a handful of areas that we focus on on the first two on the first two areas for two columns here. What we're showing is, you know, both our engagement and recognition scores. For engagement, it's important to us to understand that, you know, again, going back to being data oriented, what our customers or what our employees are thinking, how they're feeling. So this is just a sampling we actually have depending on the poll survey, five to six specific DEI related questions that we ask that are focused really on the inclusion, equity and belonging space, ranging from things like feeling empowered to voice differing views and opinions, but also feeling comfortable bringing their authentic self to work and with their team. And what we've seen is we have really strong engagement scores overall. Our overall engagement score is 84 percent. That's in the top quartile of technology companies in 2022 that we benchmark against. And we're also really proud that 92 percent of our employees feel comfortable bringing their authentic self to work. I think it's really important that we continue to measure those things and make improvement so that 100 percent ideally of employees feel that way. But, you know, this is this is an area that we'll look to continue to drive forward. On the recognition side, we're showing just some some scores from Glassdoor. We're proud of the fact that we have four point two rating out of five for diversity inclusion and overall employee ratings on a scale of one to five, like I was saying, I think the average that we see for those are three point six and three point seven respectively for all employers. So we know that we're we're on the right track. What we're also looking at and there's just an example here of some awards that we're showing. We've won top places to work by the Boston Globe. Obviously, look, our headquarters is here. It's important for us to represent well and represent our values in the Commonwealth, and we won top places to work, as well as two years in a row, their D.I. Best Practices Award for that same period of time. So very proud again to continue to focus here. Also on a campus forward program through Ripple match. So these are examples of the types of recognition we get because we believe that our program is strong. And that's important for us really to make sure that we are driving forward in training and development of our employees. So what you'll see here is a handful of areas that we've invested, whether it's the leadership consortium where we've invested in under represented groups to improve and develop in terms of leadership. Better manager where we have internal coaching programs. Shane Diamond has come in and helped us develop education program for our managers as well. And then we also drive change through our business resource groups. So for example, our women's business resource group has developed a mentor mentorship program called TK circles where there's really a grass roots effort to provide more mentorship and coaching for women across the company. So this is a sampling of the things that we do, but we look to continue to drive forward when it comes to our overall programs of learning, development, career representation, inclusion and belonging at the company. In terms of total rewards, again, this is another area where it's important for us to really drive forward an overall strategy of inclusion and belonging. So there's a sampling here of some of the benefits we've provided first being expanded benefits coverage. So from a geographic perspective, coming out of Roe versus Wade, we wanted to make sure that our employees were supported. Should they have to go to any other jurisdiction to get covered benefits, including abortion or whether it was gender affirmation, fertility, anything else. So we give our employees and dependents $10,000 to to travel wherever they might need to go to get those those needed benefits. We also provide gender affirmation benefits. So we support employees, whether it's hormone therapy, plastic surgery, other elements when it comes to gender affirmation. And then we also want to be a great place for families and provide an inclusive work environment. So we do things like overall adoption and surrogacy stipends. Anyone in the company that wants to adopt can have a $15,000 stipend to support adoption or surrogacy procedures. We look to also we just expanded our parental leave as well, for example, up to 14 weeks globally, whether you know, they are the yeah, no matter who they are, whether it's adoption or or birth. And then we also provide enhanced office accommodations as well. So we've looked to provide gender neutral bathrooms, parenting rooms for for nursing mothers and things of that nature. So we'll look to continue to push forward and we've sourced these things from our employees. We did a total reward survey a little over a year ago asking our employees what they value. And we looked to that to drive what our strategy is going forward. And then lastly when it comes to total rewards, you know, there's a lot of pay issues that we've seen crop up. Pay transparency is a big focus globally in many jurisdictions. We've launched our project internally to look at how we're going to manage pay transparency across the US across all of our jobs, pay positions and pay postings. We're expecting to to look at that. We've not yet reached a resolution there, but looking to finalize our approach by the end of Q1 of this year. And what we've also done at various points, but in 2022 we looked at a company-wide pay equity analysis and we're preliminary results are very encouraging. And we've seen that there are no statistically significant disparities or inequities between how women or minorities are compensated with their peers company-wide. Any forward? This is an overall view of our business resource groups. We have three business resource groups. The women's business resource group, DraftKings Pride and DraftKings Shades. As it says up here, the purpose of these is really to build a strong internal community, but also to impact across the business as well. There's a reason we call them business resource groups and not employee resource groups because we want to make sure that they're making a business impact. So we look to these groups as sounding boards and we'll look to, you know, explore different ideas and create more belonging across all of our employees through these groups. And these groups also have an outsized impact on the community as well. A couple of examples. We participate in the Boston Wall Black Family Reunion and sponsor the actually the spades term, which I guess is very popular as well, and did something internally where we had to gather at the green fundraiser as well that we that we look to raise money for charities that employees elected to donate to. So these are very important to us. We look to continue to expand on these groupings as we go forward again, but, you know, excited to have the representation across the teams. Another element here, you know, when it comes to us being out in the community is our efforts with veterans. So we have a program called Tech for Heroes, where we work with our, you know, across teams within the company to provide training for for veterans and, you know, are excited by the impact of this. We've seen over 600 veterans and spouses trained in tech skills since launching the program. 63 63 percent of those participants self identify as non-white as well. So this is one of those areas where we look to give back to the community, our employees directly participate in the training of veterans across the board, and it has the benefits in many cases of having a local impact as well as an impact in diversity as well. And then on this slide in terms of the last element of our employee focused efforts is, you know, as I said before, one of the last elements here is really the how do we sustain this? How do we drive this going forward? And we'll look to continue to push forward with enhanced reporting and accountability. You know, historically, we've always been able to or we've looked to provide internal transparency and reporting. We're driving more real time reporting as we go forward into this year so that leaders can make real time educated decisions and understand how their organizations are trending over the course of time, which we believe will create more accountability and drive us towards hitting our long term objectives. In terms of supplier diversity, you know, this is an area where I think our approach is going to be similar to our employee approach. I think that we have room to continue to drive forward here. We've given some examples of minority owned businesses across the board. Our focus really going into this year is to take a similar approach to what we've done with employees. Again, it's about a systematic approach. It's about being better able to understand our supplier demographics, whether it's small businesses, you know, LGBTQ plus women, minorities, veteran status, all of those things. I think that we've begun this journey but aren't where we want to be and where we aspire to be yet. We're going to continue to look and over the course of 2023 to get a better understanding of our overall supplier diversity and look to set realistic goals for our programs as we go forward and are excited by the fact that we've begun this by creating self reporting fields within COPA, which is our internal internal PO system, and we'll look to understand our supplier demographics to again make progress in this area as we go forward, but are excited by the impact that we've been able to make in the partners that would have been able to build by focusing in the Commonwealth, many of which that you see here as well. This is the last slide. You know, I think this is an area where we can truly say we are committed to making an impact and to make continued progress in DEI in terms of overall diversity. We've set goals to hit 35% of women globally by 2025 and 40% of employees in the US being BIPOC by 2025 as well. We'll look to continue to hit these aggressive goals over that period of time on the employee side and on the supplier side, what we're looking to do over the course of the next year is really getting to a better position to understand our internal information, understand the demographics of our suppliers and set goals, set realistic and aggressive long term goals as well. So with that, Chris, I'll pass it back to you. Great. Thank you, Graham. Moving on to section four of our presentation on responsible gaming. We have Chrissy Thelman, our senior director of responsible gaming, as well as Stephanie Sherman, our chief marketing officer. So with that, I'll turn it over to Chrissy. Thank you, Chris. Good morning, Chair, Madam and commissioners. And thank you for this opportunity to present our comprehensive approach to responsible gaming. As a native of Massachusetts, I was born here, raised here, went to school here and spent the predominance of my career locally, predominantly at Harvard Medical School and prior to joining DraftKings at the Massachusetts Council on Gaming and Health. From the moment I stepped into Boston headquarters, I heard from so many employees about how important responsible gaming is to their role and their desire to go above and beyond regulatory standards. To that end, I'd like to express my appreciation to the Mass Gaming Commission's strong ongoing commitment to responsible gaming and building an industry leading responsible gaming framework. At DraftKings, we are continuing to expand our responsible gaming program and have assembled a team of RG experts with extensive experience, including public health and prevention science with experience in the Game Sense program leadership and operationalizing its logic model. I'm excited about the future responsible gaming at DraftKings and look forward to working together in Massachusetts. With that said, it's my pleasure to share our strategic framework for responsible gaming. Responsible gaming is a top priority for us. Our systems based public health approach to responsible gaming leverages technology, employee training, evidence-based research, collaboration with third parties including advocacy groups and comprehensive player education to promote safe play. Our vision is to build a best in class RG program infused with innovation and formed by the latest evidence base. This approach is facilitated through a consultation contract with Cambridge Health Alliance, as Jason mentioned earlier. Our strategic framework is based on five key pillars. They are training and education, detection and intervention, external engagements and research, marketing and advertising and platform tools and resources. And I'll go into a deeper dive on each of these pillars starting with our training and education program. I strongly believe that the best trained workforce will translate to the most informed player base. Our senior manager for responsible gaming, Julie Hines, as some of you may know as the former director of the Game Sense program when she was at the mass council on gaming and health, works diligently to provide thoughtful and interactive trainings and resources to our employees and our players. To that end, we've created a robust training and education program that engages all employees starting at onboarding and we're targeted in nuanced trainings with our customer-facing employees. These trainings ensure our employees are introduced and familiarized to RG from the get-go. This empowers empathy and good decision-making and propels employee morale by doing the right thing. We've also created an intranet specifically for deep for DraftKings employees which is a one-stop shop that is all things RG at DraftKings. It provides resources like training events and schedules, key DraftKings RG initiatives, facts, quizzes, internal resources, external resources and current events. In 2021, we engaged with Epic Risk Management, a global gaming harm reduction organization to provide training on lived experiences on a quarterly basis. Many employees have never known an individual with or heard a story about someone who has a gambling problem. These trainings allow our employees to see firsthand how gaming problems can emerge. We provide an open forum for dialogue and have questions and answers immediately after each training. These trainings are offered to all DraftKings employees and have been extremely well received. Not only do we want to have a well-educated workforce, but we also want our players to be educated. We want them to have all the information and knowledge on how to play on our platforms as possible. We've created education hubs for all our platforms. And in our sports book hub, you can find information on player literacy, learn the lingo where betting types are explained. As we know, research has indicated improved gaming literacy translates to more informed decision making and more sustainable players. We provide betting basics like how to read the odds, money lines, over and under, just to name a few, as well as sports guys so players can be informed about the sports they're betting on. Last year, we launched our public facing responsive gaming resource called DKSaperPlay.com. It's a website dedicated to promoting safe and positive play. The goal of this site is to advance the knowledge base about RG and PG and to increase safe play tool utilization, to increase gaming literacy, and to provide robust tools and resources for help. This site includes key information about responsible gaming and problem gaming. It provides quizzes, myths and facts, information about limit setting, how to use our tools, how to videos on how to engage with our tools, information about how to get help in the event of a gambling problem, and the like. The site is available to the public and you do not have to have an account to access this information. Our responsible gaming motto is, it's more fun when it's for fun. We have set protocols and procedures to help mitigate harm among our players. Regardless of how integrated data science is in our programming, at the end of the day, we are dealing with a person on the other end of the platform. And we know we need to engage with them with honesty, integrity, and transparency. We have a player protection team that is dedicated solely to ensuring that our players engage safely with our products. Our player protection team has the ability to temporarily ban account all the way up to permanently closing an account. Any player identified to be at risk of potential problematic play is provided with resources like the National 1-800 Gambler number, local program gambling helpline numbers, and jurisdictional resources for problem gambling resources. Implementing a systems-based approach involves meaningful engagement with our external stakeholder base. Looking at our external engagements, Research Pillar, we are dedicated to being part of the community that seeks solutions to improve safety and positive play. To that end, we have engaged in a variety of efforts that involve external stakeholders. DraftKings is an active member of the American Gaming Association. We participate as active committees and engage with ongoing research initiatives such as Responsible Gaming Education Month held annually in September. In 2021, we committed to ongoing support of their Have-A-Game plan that responsibly campaign. And we also adhere to their responsible marketing code for sports wagering. We've engaged with Beth Locker, which is a free blocking software program that blocks over 18,000 gaming websites. It can be installed on as many devices as a customer would like. And this tool is completely free to use and anonymous. As Jason mentioned earlier, we have a long-standing relationship with the Cambridge Health Alliance Division on Addictions, and we engage with them to provide guidance on evidence-based consultation. As I mentioned previously, we engage with Epic Risk Management, and since 2021 have engaged their services to provide quarterly lived experiences training. We contributed to the Sports Wagering Fund at the International Center on Responsible Gaming to support groundbreaking research, looking at the prevalence and risk in sports betting in the United States. We've also provided funding for the IICG's annual conference. As Graham just alluded to, we have a very strong interest in veterans. DraftKings has engaged in a multi-year financial commitment to Cambridge Research Institute for new research to study the nexus of veterans and responsible gaming with the goal of advancing evidence-based research in this area and improving the lives of impacted veterans. Most recently, we supported KRI's innovative Military Research Associate Program, also known as MRAP, which assists veterans transitioning from military service to advanced training in mental health research. MRAP is using gambling disorder as the lens to study public mental health. These programs dovetail nicely with our Tech for Heroes program, and DraftKings is the only U.S.-based operator contributing to these projects. We are Platinum members of the National Council on Problem Gambling, and our staff sits on various committees. We are active participants in the Problem Gambling Awareness Month held annually in March, and I'm extremely proud to share that in 2022, we received three awards from the National Council. I am humbled and honored to have been awarded the Don Feeney Award for Responsible Gaming Excellence. Julie Heinz, our senior manager for responsible gaming, was awarded the Don Huland Award for Advocacy. And the award I'm most proud of is our team award. We won the award for Corporate Social Responsibility, an award given to an organization that demonstrated outstanding commitment to social responsibility as it relates to problem gambling in the past year. These awards are a testament to our commitment to our employees and our customers to elevate responsible gaming. As Jason also mentioned, last year, DraftKings announced over a 1.5 million dollar gaming initiative called the State Council Funding Program. It's a multi-year financial commitment to the state affiliates of the National Council on Problem Gambling, unleashing critical funding to support the work of these local nonprofit organizations. We made the conscious decision to fund all state councils, regardless if we are live in the state or not. Each participating council receives $15,000 annually to use up their discretion. And I'm very proud to say that the Mass Council on Gaming Health is a recipient of this donation. We also engage with our peers across the industry, as you have heard some of my colleagues mentioned previously. We recently committed to the first industry-led responsible gaming standards. The 12 Point Pledge is a commitment to our principles of responsible online gaming and are recommended as principles for an industry benchmark. All these partnerships are a testament to our systems-based approach. As you can see, we have a robust program that educates our workforce, promotes positive play, and works to minimize gaming-related harm. I'll now pass it over to Stephanie Sherman, our Chief Marketing Officer, who will go over our Marketing and Advertising Pillar. And our Product and Tools and Resource Pillar will be discussed in our next session. Thank you very much. Steph? Thanks, Christine. Good morning, Madam Chair and Commissioners. I am Stephanie Sherman, our Chief Marketing Officer, also a lifelong resident of Massachusetts, born in Medfield, and currently live in Needham and echo the sentiment from Graham, one of the first things I hear when I work for DraftKings is when is this, when is a sports betting coming to Massachusetts? In partnership with Chrissy and her team, we have a culture of compliance within DraftKings Marketing and we're constantly evolving, learning and take very seriously our role as a leader in the industry to ensure we promote responsible play. Core pieces of this that the team think about every day are only advertising to those of legal age, no marketing presence at colleges and universities, excluding individuals that have self excluded from marketing communications and in general developing and delivering and distributing holistic end-to-end marketing campaigns across not just our database but through our social platforms, TV, retail, presence and in-stadium. Part of this are dedicated and automated communications, responsible gaming messaging upon first deposit, monthly dedicated communications through CRM across our social platforms at least twice weekly. And as Chrissy mentioned, adherence to the AGA responsible marketing code as well as engaging and participating in have a game plan that responsibly campaign. In addition to the training that Chrissy walked through, we also have launched the practice safe bets campaign in 2022 across again a holistic end-to-end distribution plan across TV, our platforms with the goal to encourage and desigmatize the use of responsible gaming tools. So you can see here in the screenshot the practice safe bets campaign featuring Tony Hawk, which encourages using limit setting tools and taking breaks. We arrived at this campaign through customer research, multiple rounds to ensure that the messaging was communicated, resonating and focusing on what is important and as well understood to encourage the use of our responsible gaming tools. On the next slide, speaking to our relationship with marketing affiliates, critical to all parts of our marketing strategy, but certainly as we evaluate new business relationships, responsible gaming is top of mind. We collaborate with professionals and companies, individuals that share our commitment to responsible play. We offer education, we partner closely to ensure that the content is meeting our marketing and regulatory standards, such as the helpline information and our commitment to the AGA code of conduct extends to our affiliates. We take this very seriously and we take action up to and including termination of any partners or relationships we have for non-compliance with the guidelines provided by Dragkings. And before I hand it back over to Chris, do want to share that this cultural compliance is a focus across the marketing team embedded in our goals and an ongoing journey and process that we're constantly evolving. Thank you, Steph. Thank you, Chrissy. Moving on to the final section of our presentation on our product and technology, which will lead into a product demonstration, we have Jeremy McCauley, our director of product with us today. So Jeremy, I'll ask for it. Thank you, Chris. And good morning, Madam Chair and commissioners. As Chris said, my name is Jeremy McCauley, director of product at Dragkings. I'm also a lifelong resident of the Commonwealth who was born and raised here. I went to college here. I've worked my entire professional career in the Commonwealth at Dragkings and my family and I still reside in the state. Dragkings is one of the only vertically integrated digital sports book operators in North America with our proprietary player account management and sports betting platform. Our PAM is comprised of our user wallet and KYC controls, geolocation system and controls, account information and transaction history, user permissions and restrictions, self-exclusions and Kuloff's and internal marketing CX and operational tooling. Our sports wager and platform is comprised of our event and marketing creation, pricing, risk management, trading tools, and that placement and settlement functionality. Our proprietary technology has received GLI 33 certification and is tested by numerous regulatory agencies on a routine basis for integrity monitoring. Our technology is highly scalable and custom tailored to meet state specific regulations. The configurability of our platform allows our PAM and sports wager and platform to have unique and specific configurations to private specific markets for events, promotional offers and more. Our platform has proven up time of 99.98% and with the ability of processing tens of thousands of bets per minute across the distributed network of all of our all of our servers. Our player count management system has an industry leading know your customer waterfall leveraging numerous identity verification providers such as Lexus Nexus and SoCure, who are trusted entities by state and federal agencies and leading financial institutions in the nation. Each of our identity verification vendors check citizens or national database information, credit header file information, electorals, property records, utility data and telecom sources to validate patron information. Additionally, each identity verification vendor rub cross references our patron data against government watchers such as Office of Foreign Asset Control politically exposed persons, Children's Online Privacy Protection Act and Social Security Administration master that file to upload the integrity of our PAM and remain compliant with state and federal laws. For customers at our KYC measures cannot successfully identify we leverage a third party document authentication solution to validate the authenticity of a state issue driver's license or identification card to augment the onboarding process. We also have the ability to deploy additional authentication mechanisms such as knowledge-based authentication questions which are typically presented in the form of three questions that only the individual signing up for the account should know and other passive methodologies to ease the onboarding process. Our PAM is supported by the most trusted solution in the geospatial industry, GeoComply. DraftKings has GeoComply's leading solutions integrated directly into our iOS and Android applications and a downloadable plug-in is required for use when operating our digital sportsbook from a laptop or computer device. GeoComply software analyzes over 350 data points per request to ensure DraftKings customers are located in permitted jurisdictions and they are not using any software to circumvent our geolocation controls. Using GeoComply, we can confidently prohibit the use of VPNs, proxy servers, Tor nodes, and many other applications to provide a compliant and safe wagering experience. Geolocation requests from DraftKings player account management platform begin at once the user logs in and then on an interval basis throughout the user session. This is conducted between DraftKings and GeoComply using an algorithm that is dictated by the user's proximity to the nearest state border. And we can jump into the next slide, please. Now I'd like to walk you through a demo of our onboarding experience for a user who would download our iOS or Android application. When downloading the DraftKings sportsbook app from the iOS or Google Play Store, a user would be required to launch the native app. At this point in time, we are going to require the user to allow their native location services. At this stage, what we are conducting is a site approximation check to determine where the user is to so our platform can set up the site experience and the state-specific rules and regulations for that jurisdiction. This is using the coordinates from a user's device similar to what you would see if you were using Google Maps, Apple Maps or another GPS location system. Once a user has allowed their locations to be used which is always required to operate our app, they would see our initial page to sign up with their account. Customers are required to provide us a username, email and password and then we proceed them to provide their personal identifiable information. At this stage, we are always requesting that user provide us with their first and last name, their date of birth, their last four, their SSN and their address. We support Google Autocomplete and configurable fields on the form where if we are unable to verify the patron with their first attempt, we will then request the full nine SSN as part of that verification request. After a user successfully verifies, we proceed to ask for their phone number and they are required to provide us consent with state specific agreements as shown on the screen. Next slide. One thing I'd like to call out is at the point of our identity verification check for any account creation, we are also conducting a KYC or excluded patron matching mechanism. DraftKings partners with each of our jurisdictional and regulatory bodies to ingest self exclusion or prohibited better list which we store in our database locally. Each identity verification check that we take is cross-referenced against that database internally and if any user is matched against that using their full nine SSN or a combination of other data elements, they are excluded from playing on our platform. Additionally, as we ingest these files from regulators, existing accounts that I've previously verified will be blocked in real time. Moving on to our user wallet, DraftKings does leverage a single wallet for all of our products to provide a seamless experience for all of our customers. A customer who is navigating either through our sports for product casino or DFS product from state to state, will see a consistent experience throughout their wallet with payment methods varying based on their location and state specific regulations. And as an example, I'd like to show you what our deposit experience would be as the user was select an online banking method which is one of our most preferred by our customers and through the product itself. The user who was logging in, we'll see multiple options here such as debit card, online banking, PayPal, e-check, Venmo. We try to do our best to offer players the most secure and most convenient ways to deposit funds. A user who's selecting online banking will have the opportunity to go through this flow where they can select their bank as you can see here and it's as simple as them then entering their credentials to their bank. Next slide. And through the partnership with our payment providers and platforms, our users then have to go through multi-factor authentication steps with their bank and our platform to make sure that they are accessing their bank account. It is the authorized user. So they go through both not only a security question if that is set up, we will then have them send a text message to the phone number on file and or email address. And from there, they can select which account they would like to deposit those funds through. And as you can see on the final page, the user then can confirm their deposit which is instantaneous from their online banking account to their drop Kings account. For users, we'll want to make sure that getting funds onto the site is a top priority and getting their money off the site is equally as important and quick and users have the ability to withdraw to multiple payment methods such as PayPal check, we can refund directly to online banking account and previously used deposit mechanisms that were used prior for those refund purposes. We will not allow a user to refund to a PayPal, a debit card, Venmo or checking account that we have never seen used for a prior deposit. Next slide please. And continuing with our withdrawal experience to make sure customers are informed and they know when their withdrawal is going to be provided to them. We ensure that we provide a progress status bar throughout the entire process of the withdrawal. From the moment the withdrawal is submitted by the user to the time it is processed by our agents and our systems, users can see in real time the delivery of the withdrawal and the status so they can stay informed when they will get their money securely and safely. After depositing a withdrawal, you just have the ability to go through their account transaction history and statements. We provide users the ability to sort by product, all products, date range going back 12 months and seeing specific wagers placed in specific transactions based on the product that we're using. As you can see in the third screen shot here, this is an example of a customer could see of a bet they've placed on our platform whether the outcome was positive or negative for them. That they are able to look at the date, the amount, the balance they want, what their ending balance was. We try to provide as much information to our customers. So again, they have all the tools and information required so they feel comfortable and confident using our platform. We also provide the ability to use and see lifetime aggregate amounts of deposits withdrawals, activity in terms of bet placement or other activity on our site so they can not only manage their play but they can effectively view what they have conducted on our website. For our responsible gaming platform tools and resources, we have multiple mechanisms and tools in place to not only provide user-facing features but we have backend automation as well to make sure we are protecting our customers and identifying at-risk behavior. As you can see from the slide here we have many features that our customers can take advantage of and that are also enacted automatically at our platform. In most states, we have configurable times where after 15 minutes, 30 minutes or 45 minutes of inactivity, we will automatically log a user out of their account. We also have access to easily accessible page protection pages, our responsible gaming limits that are all custom tailored to meet the requirements of the regulatory body that we are working with to make sure the resources are at the fingertips of our customers when and if they shall move those. Next slide, please. Our page and protection pages can be found on any one of our site experiences when located in permitted jurisdictions. Again, these are custom tailored so that we can provide links to state specific resources, national hotlines, brochures and these pages can maintain any content that a regulator would like us to have so players can access additional resources and understand knowing their limits, what programs are offered and how they can leverage those tools on our platform. And they always know they can contact us 24 seven if they have any additional questions around our responsible gaming policies and procedures. Next slide. This is an example of our player limits page that our customers would see when going to set a responsible gaming limit. We offer deposit, wager, loss limits, max wager and time limits. Each limit is offered at a daily, weekly and monthly level with the exception of max wager and time. For deposit and wager, customers can go in and set daily, weekly and monthly limits that they can control their play. We also have the ability to set up notifications as a soft limit in the event that a user wants to just be simply notified after they've deposited X amount of dollars into their account. In addition, we offer a cool ops and self-exclusion periods and we as discussed participate in local, state and federal self-exclusion programs for our customers. This is an example of our cool off and self-exclusion pages. You can see here our cool off is supported from three days up to four weeks. However, this is also controlled at a jurisdictional level. If any regulatory body we work with would like a duration shorter than three days or longer than four weeks that is configurable on our platform. And we support that in several jurisdictions and same with self-exclusion. This is a sample self-exclusion of what we would show in one of our live jurisdictions. However, the durations can again, customize based on the location of the user at the time of submitting the request along with the verification of the patron information's account to validate the submission of that self-exclusion request. Excellent. And just to go a bit further into our ability in terms of processing self-exclusion records and our commitment to ensuring prohibited patrons are not allowed to play on our platform. We have three different methods in which we routinely receive excluded patron information to our system. The most preferred by most regulators is using an SFTP server where DraftKings will do all the work to set up a shared folder. And it's as simple as the regulator providing us a standard CSV file with columns with PII that is then securely transferred over to this SFTP server. Our folder is checking these daily on a cadence of 15 to 30 minutes. Every time we detect a new file, we are able to extract that file securely transmitted into our system and begins ingesting those records to our known person database which again is used at the point of account creation to identify any prohibited patrons and cross-reference our existing patron data to exclude players who joined a list after registering their account. We also support API integrations to do this from a technological standpoint and a regulator portal if that is already built and supported by the regulatory body itself. Before moving on to the live demo of the sports wagering product, is there any questions I can answer about the material we just went through? Can I show this to you? Thank you. Okay, thank you. Wonderful, I'm just connecting into the meeting now. Second screen. So now I'll walk the commission through a live demo of our sports wagering product and sorry, because everyone, is this rendering properly to the screen? We've seen it. Okay, I just want to make sure on our site too, we're able to see the, I don't know if that would do in real time. Just to confirm, Madam Chair, you can see our sports book application homepage. I don't think it's showing on the page. It still has the casting box up there, which method you're using. Yeah, let me try again, one second. Yes, still spinning on HD meeting. There we go. Now you've got it. That employees of Drapkings are provided with, so the experience you see will emulate a user that is located in a permitted jurisdiction. So at this time I'm going to log in and we offer biometrics for customers, the customers to log in. Once they're auto logged out, they can easily log in just by using the biometrics, whether it's facial recognition or the thumbprint on their device. So I will log in now. I have two factor authentication enabled on my device. You can see here, I received the code, I put that in, and now I've logged into my account. What I'm going to do quickly is just emulate my location into the jurisdiction my phone is set up to, just so again, you can see what a user located in a valid jurisdiction would be able to see. And so any time a user logs in, this is the experience they will see for our sports betting home screen. For new customers who have just completed the registration process, they will be prompted with several educational material prompts to determine if they want to go through a onboarding process to learn sports betting 101, understanding as Chris was saying, the lingo or the language used that's associated with sports betting and other information to get them comfortable with using our product before making a decision on whether they'd like to deposit and place a wager. I will show those pages in a second, but before I do, I just want to go through our navigational components quickly just to show that the screen you see here in terms of the top level nav that I am scrolling, this is all configurable by the jurisdiction that the user is located in. You can see here that it's a sports book, Quick Parlay and other features and products we offer that is tailored to meet the jurisdictional requirements and or what we feel is best for that particular state. We also have a search function, so any user can log in and quickly search for a player, an event, a market, get as quickly as possible to their desired bet selection in the event that they are a more experienced player. Below that, you will see the daily offers, whether it's for new users or based on a jurisdictional cadence, and this is also dictated by the location of the user. And this is dynamic in the sense that if you were in New Hampshire, you would see a one set of promotional offers. If you were to go to Connecticut or New York or other states that sportsway during and draft Kings platform is live in, this would change based on your location. And then one of the nicest features we have is our markets available. As you can see, I'm scrolling through here. This is actually dictated based on the users history of that placement. So as the user starts placing more wagers in one particular sport or market, this we are certainly gonna then bring those tiles forward to them so it's a quick access and easily easily used way for them to find the market they want to place their wager. And as I was saying earlier for new customers who are onboarding, we wanna make sure that they feel comfortable and that they have all the tools and resources available to them to make the decision to continue using our product. And that starts with sports betting 101 where a customer can see all of the basics in terms of how to read odds, what a money line is, what spread betting over under, live betting, parlay. And this is a really useful tool for individuals who are interested in sports betting, maybe they've never placed a bet before it might seem a bit overwhelming. This is a really easy way for them to just quickly identify that it might not be as scary as they think are as complicated and to provide them very easy instructions on how to place a money line wager and other wagers supported. And as we are going through, I also wanna call out that we provide in our help center not only how to bet but this is where users will be able to contact our CX team. Again, 24 seven, they can look through our FAQ articles before deciding to reach out to our customer support if we are unable to answer their questions with our helpful articles. Additionally, we have our house rules, document upload center. And as you can see here in the screens that we went through before, our page and protection center, not only will include our page and protection page. Again, this is jurisdictionally set up for New York's, you're gonna see state specific resources there, but our customers are also able to go to their player limits section and they're able to set their deposit wager, max wager and time limits which are set on an hours per day basis. We structure all of this in an easily findable place for our customers to make sure again that they are comfortable when using our platform. And for customers, yes. On this page, this is where the home page, this is where I would go. Can you show me, no, this is not the home page. This is the home page here. Yeah, okay. Can you show me responsible gaming language? Oh, you shifted. Yeah, so our responsible gaming. And I was wondering if it's on the actual, is there something on the home page? On the home page, it would not be, it would be within the my account section. If you were on our full desktop or mobile site, you'd be able to see that in the footer. We also are able to, you see up here where it has the DK logo. We are also able to configure this to place our G disclaimers and other, any state specific requirements on this home page. So it's highly customizable to show that. New York just does not have any of these required. So that's why you don't see any here. Well, so it's New York. So, and if you could just show me where it would go, like in a state that's required, where would it be? Yep, so I can transition really quickly to- Oh, I was actually pointing to the front, the home page like, wait. Yep, no problem. So that we could show disclaimers, not only where the, you see the DK crown logo right up top. We could also add it to the bottom of the page itself, where if you look down and see where it says home, in game, my vets, we can also make it configurable to show any RG disclaimers or links to RG there as well. Yeah, so it could link to your page on responsible gaming too. That is cool. Yep. Thanks, sorry to disrupt. Nope, not a problem at all. Feel free to interject at any time for Madam Chair or any of the commissioners. Thank you. And continuing with the sports betting experience, for users who I'm just gonna walk through now the process of placing a wager for our customers. So I already have a balance in my account, as you can see. And then I've selected this weekend's NFL market and just going through here, users are able to easily see and be spread the total in terms of the over under or the money line. We make it very simple for users to not only place a wager, but they can see their bets lit pop up. They can place the wager, the amount they would like to wager. We have pre-selected dominations of one, five and 20. Users are also able to submit the value of their liking based again on their limits that are set and what is available in their balance. For the purpose of this bet placement, I'm just going to submit $1. I'm going to place that bet. And then you can see here that I've successfully placed this wager and it tells me who I picked the Seahawks money line, the wager and the total payout in the event that my bet is going to win. And then I can click done and then I can navigate to the my bet section. And here's where I'm able to see all open bets that are currently associated to my account. So as you can see here, I had a pre-existing bet for the Boston Celtics to cover the spread tonight at nine and a half. And I have the Seahawks here as well. What I can do based on a per market and per event basis is also utilize the cash out function. So this will allow me to cash my bet out early before the game ends and reclaim some of the funds that I wagered. So just to show you that as an example, I would like to cash this out. I'm going to confirm. And I've cashed this bet out and I've been paid out 91 cents for the dollar I will do to navigate back. And in addition to placing a straight bet, we can also walk through placing a parlay and same game parlay. For customers who want to place wagers on multiple events, they can select, again, just easily go through our bet slip. As you can see here, I'm going to put $1 on the LA Chargers money line. And then if I'd like to parlay that or add more, I can click add more. My bet slip, as you can see, will stay at the bottom of the screen so I can see what my odds are. And then I can select an additional game and I'm going to select the Miami Dolphins money line as well. And then here is my standard parlay that is set just on two different events. And I can see, I can either place single individual wagers or I have the ability to just place the parlay, which I will do for $2. At this point in time, I can see the odds that are offered. I could see the payout and the amount that I'm looking to wager. I can place this wager, get successfully. And at this point in time, a geolocation check, as I said, is conducted at my first login and then continually throughout my session using the app. And that's based on my proximity to the nearest border based on an interval that geocomply is passing back to our systems with each check that they're analyzing. And I am done placing this wager. And as you can see here, they're also same game parlayers. This is a feature that is very new to the industry, only a handful of operators are using this as you can see. Can I stop you for one second? This is Commissioner Bryan. Can I just ask, is there a step that was needed to actually put that through? Cause I'm wondering how you're sitting in Boston and looking like you're putting a bet through on your app. Yeah. If you saw, if my screen didn't render that earlier, I apologize. I am using a test account internally for employees. So I have specific configurations and rules that are set up for my account to emulate that if I was in a permitted jurisdiction. So I was able to- It's fabricated, so to speak. You're not overrunning geolocation. That is correct. Yes. I'm on our local VPN, which is set up with Geo complied for this very purpose. So we can test the product and emulate what the experience of a user located in the common world. Great. Thank you. You're welcome. And sorry, going back to placing a same game parlay, just walking through here, I will go to this offer. So as you can see here, tap here to enable same game parlay. So at this point in time, I can now place wagers specifically on the outcome of the Giants in Minnesota Vikings game by picking the spread and parlaying that with a prop bet or other events offered within this market for this particular game. And the odds will be slightly better for the same game parlay in the same experience where I can go through, I can place that wager. Again, at this point in time, still with working with Geo complied, making sure I'm within an permitted jurisdiction to place that wager. And before I conclude our technology demo in terms of placing a bet, the ease of use of the navigational experience for those customers, is there any questions I can answer for the commission about the experience you see in front of you here or what we reviewed prior in the slide deck? Questions. Madam Chair, I'm not so sure I have a question about the platform, but it's been brought up in the last minute or so about the in game bets. And I think I heard you say that this is relatively new to the industry. That would be the same game parlay feature. It was the same game, the same game. Yeah, thank you. Can you talk or elaborate a little bit about this new scheme, if you will? Yep. To educate us. Of course. Commissioner Hill, on the line, we also have Greg Corollis who's our Senior Vice President of Sportsbook. You may be best positioned to answer that question. Greg, if you're on. Yeah, sure. So the same game parlay feature has probably been around in the market for around two years, 18 months, something like this in the U.S. market, that is. And that's where basically you can build a bet where it's selections from the same event which are related. So obviously if you take a certain team to win and then you pick a couple of touchdown scores to also score from that same team, you wouldn't just do a multiplication of the odds to arrive at a price for the user. You would have to do a calculation that takes into account the fact that all of these different selections are related. And that's the so-called same game parlay. And that feature is now evolved where you can actually, as well as having this as just one, a bet with just this event, you can actually then parlay this into another event. So you could take this with other outrides or you could take this into an NBA single game to create a parlay with this same game parlay. So it's just a way of creating a bet with selections which are related from the same event, basically. So it's been in the industry a while. It's evolving, there's extensions to it now where this can be done through live pre-packs now as well and live builders and it's something which is definitely taken off in the US market. So when it comes to the odds, is that an in-house thing that dictates the odds? Because during the game, and I think we had a discussion with another applicant at one point. So at the 50 yard line, who's gonna get the next touchdown? Well, as we get closer to the goal line, now we're on the 10 yard line, those odds are changing as the ball is moving down the field. Is that all dictated by draftings or is it an outside source that directs those odds? So it depends for what part of the product. So for all of our live in-game bets, for the majority of them, I should say, we dictate the pricing, we do use third parties primarily to power live incident data and for some pricing, we use third parties to power certain in-game live markets, a minute to minute markets for players in-game as well. All of those vendors have gone through the licensing they need to in the States, which we use them and it would be the same in Massachusetts. So if you can answer this publicly in case I'm asking something that may have to go in executive session. So if I, let's say I have, I'm one of those betters and I have three companies on my phone. Is it possible or is it probable that those odds could be different in all three companies on the same-game parlays? Great, great, I apologize. Commissioner Hela, just because of sensitivities around competitiveness, if that is a question- That's why I'm asking. Yes, if that is a question, we can answer in executive session, we appreciate that. So Todd, if you could write that down, I'd appreciate that, please. Well, can I just follow up on that? Under our statute, and I apologize, I haven't looked at this most recently, so I may be wrong. So Todd, you're listening. In play are considered tier two. A statute, so you have to use official data or data that you've entered into an agreement with the operator, being you. It's also due to our official data. So those, that's a treat a little bit differently in terms of the data feed in mass resistance. Is that being about anyone here, lawyers involved? It definitely rings a bell. I'd have to go double-check the actual language. I understand that. I think in the definitions alone, it's referenced. So that's just something to keep in mind now that we've had a few discussions around in play that's considered tier two. I don't know if we have that on our right scheme, and I'm not hearing our applicant addressing it, but I'm wondering in other jurisdictions, is there a data feed requirement in play that's? There are certain states that, and I apologize I don't have the statute right in front of me, as far as official lead data, we do work with partners that provide official lead data in multiple jurisdictions, and we need any state-specific regulatory or statutory requirements. So it's not something we're unfamiliar with. I just apologize. I don't know offhand if there is a statutory requirement. The statute is about three inches on my hand right now, but I just don't wanna pick it up because I've got Joe from GLI who is probably going to be able to respond. Yeah, so just really quickly, it's 205-CMR 24705, Data Sources and Fish League Data, except as otherwise provided, a sports wagering operator may use any licensed data source, determine the results of all tier one sports wagers and tier two sports wagers, subject to the conditions that are listed under that regulation. So you're saying both? I think I'm the statute is, we can guess that. I read that straight off. The details, yeah, that's correct. The details aren't important. I guess my only point was to Commissioner Hill that the data that the legislature did dictate a little bit about the data here. Madam Chair, we also specific to draftings and any questions around data on the line, we have Jake List, who's our Senior Director of Regulatory Operations. He may be able to speak to this at a high level if that would be helpful. To the extent that it's gonna help educate me, I would welcome that. Thank you so much. Sure, James. Thanks, Chris, for the introduction and good morning to Madam Chair and the commissioners. The reference that you're citing about potentially requirements to use official League data, we do have similar requirements in a few other jurisdictions already. So in terms of if there was, I wish to do something similar in Massachusetts. We're already partnering with the major sports leagues and this wouldn't be an issue for draftings. And Madam Chair, we did the statute. I apologize, we did look at the statute and it's not prescriptive, but it does give the sports governing bodies a right to request official League data. In any instance that that takes place, as Jake said, we do already work with many of the League vendors to provide the data. Right, it is where they can step in or they approve some other kind of arrangement. Great, thank you. So I just wanted to reference that to show him. Madam Chair, there are no other questions. Thank you, Jeremy, for the product demonstration. Specific to your questions around the RG responsible gaming disclosures within the application, if it would be helpful, we could follow up with some visuals of within the application and the website where those disclaimers would go if that's something that the commission would like. Right, we would welcome that. I just happened to notice I couldn't find any RG icon or anything on the front page and seems to be a good place to start. So if your system allows for it, I'm not sure what our actual regs will require on that. So thank you. We'll provide some tackles following the hearing so that you have a clear reference. All right, other questions from the technology just before he closes, Mr. McCauley. Great, well, thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair and thank you commissioners. That now concludes our affirmative presentation and product demonstration. We appreciate the commission's thoughtful consideration of our application and respectfully request that the commission find Crown MA gaming LLC doing business as draft kings, preliminarily suitable and issue a category three license for the operation of mobile sports wagering in the commonwealth. We thank you again and remain ready to answer any questions you may have. And so thank you so much. We appreciate the application and we appreciate the presentation and demonstration. We do have our own in-house experts. GNI's just stepped in on just a moment ago that we'd like to hear from. I'm gonna do a little check in on my fellow commissioners. We could go through that and then do a lunch break perhaps and return to our section by section analysis for the applicant. If that works, it's good quarter of 12. Mushers? Works for me. Okay, that works. All right. Works for me as well, Madam Chair. Excellent, so we'll get going. The next, it is 4B on our agenda and this is the presentation analysis relevant to the review and evaluation of our craft kings application. And if we will be looking at the technical components that GNI will present to us, we'll then look at the report on suitability presented by our own IEV and then we'll have RSVM follow-up on the financial and economic impact. So I'm turning to the board of GNI. Good morning again, Joe. Thank you for stepping in earlier. Good morning, Madam Chair. I just have a kind of a brief story. It was 10 years ago where a friend of mine, John Aguilar, said, hey, you should meet this company I'm getting involved with. Went out for drinks and met a couple of his colleagues. It was good to see you, Paul and Mr. Robbins. They'll know me as Joe Tall. And since there was some brief talk about me living in Boston, I had been out West for a while. I could not think about going back to Boston and shoveling snow. So since I took the blue pill and did not see how far the rabbit hole goes, Draft King was maybe 10 people at the time, Paul. Yeah, so it was quite a while ago. It was kind of wild that here we are. So with that, I will hand it off to my colleague, account executive for Massachusetts, Gabe Benedict. Okay, okay. Thank you. Good morning, Chair and commissioners. Joe alluded to, I'm Gabe Benedict for GLI and I'm your rep for Massachusetts. I cover you guys. I'm here to give an overview of the submittal certification and verification process regarding mobile applications and other digital platforms approved by the commission. The submittal preparation includes the following. If it is a platform we are familiar with, a modification list from the last submission to one or more US jurisdictions will be requested and reviewed to set the project plan for Massachusetts, considering any changes to the platform and all specific Massachusetts rules and regulations. During that process, we will review the technology architect documentation, which is a complete comprehensive and technically accurate description and explanation of the sports wagering systems. This includes a description of all hardware devices and virtual servers, a description of all server and client software modules, including the software versions, the layout of all the network communications between the various software and hardware modules and an explanation of all third party integrated systems. Now post the technical documentation review, the critical files regarding compliance will be identified and documented. Then a complete project plan is put in place, taking into account the unique architect and design of the platform and the specific Massachusetts gaming commission rules and regulations. The lab will run a supervised compilation of the source files, the signature of those files and the complication steps and the signatures of the compiled code. Once complete, the source code can be submitted for testing in a locked down environment. GLI will then review the player account management platform known as PAM for registration, age, identification, verification, account controls, payments, reporting, responsible gaming controls, required disclosures and geolocation. Now geolocation testing commences in two parts, a field test to verify borders through sampling along the entire border while completing edge case technical tests. The field test would also cover any other restricted areas defined by the Massachusetts gaming commission. A subversive work around detection will commence in the lab including but not limited to VPN and proxy usage, GPS spoofing, code manipulation and man in the middle attacks. GLI will verify the sports book in total for events, markets, point spreads, bed acceptance and the corresponding timestamps and logging. We'll verify the enforcement of bedding limits and all edge cases. Also verify the pre-event and live data feeds, post-event bed settling, the corresponding timestamps and all logging and reporting. We will also review the change management process and procedures. After all the technical check-offs are met, certifications can be issued when GLI verifies the changes made for Massachusetts specific deployments including source code differential and change testing to the last reviewed version. And GLI has evaluated that the product has met all the Massachusetts specific requirements. After certifications are issued and the MGC accepts them, field verification will be conducted in conjunction with the Massachusetts Gaming Commission. This procedure will be finalized in the upcoming weeks and during that time, the following will commence. Verification at the production server including verification of critical file signatures, reviews of internal controls for procedures to operate the book. We'll check technology for configurations such as proper setup of roles and user rights assignments and potentially interview key personnel to ensure they know and will follow procedures from the internal controls. At this point, they will have met the technical requirements for operations of a sports book in the Commonwealth. And this concludes our presentation of the submittal certification and verification process. My question is for David and Joe. I think you'll be available should something come up. So if you'll be on call, thank you. Have you? Thank you. I will turn to, I guess it's attorney Kramer, Councilor Kramer, good morning. Good morning. Good morning, Chair and commissioners. The IEB submitted a report regarding the preliminary suitability of Crown mass gaming LLC doing business as draft kings. This applicant is seeking an untethered category of three license. The IEB performed this review for preliminary suitability in accordance with the standards and criteria set forth into five CMR 215.01 subsection two. As a precursor to this review, the licensing division in conjunction with the IEB performed a scoping review of the applicant under section 5B of 23N. And we identified four entities and four individuals that we designated as qualifiers in connection with draft kings application. Those qualifiers are listed on pages one and two of our report. The licensing division has performed a review of the existing submissions for deficiencies and there are no substantive deficiencies. There have been ongoing communication over some pieces. The applicant has been responsive and nothing significant is outstanding. As mentioned, the IEB's review was performed in accordance with the REG. The governing regulation is set forth on page three of our report. And note again that this review was done for preliminary suitability and we did not perform a full suitability investigation. Our team was comprised of contract investigators including former members of the state police gaming enforcement unit which was attorney Mike Banks and his team as well as contract investigators from the firm of RSM. Their work was being performed with the collaboration and the oversight of the IEB. The review for preliminary suitability is summarized in the report and it includes the following. A summary of draft kings licensing status as disclosed in this application. A summary of its compliance history and other jurisdictions as disclosed in its application. A summary of pending litigation valued at over 100,000 as disclosed in its application. A summary of the open source review of the applicant and individual qualifiers but not entity qualifiers pursuant to the REG. And with respect to the RSM side, that team prepared a report that appears as exhibit one. They reviewed disclosed financial information of the applicant and in this case, their review was supplemented by the financial filings of the publicly-tweeted ultimate parent company draft kings incorporated as filed with the SEC. They presented financial ratios and reviewed forecasting submissions submitted by the applicant as well as summarize self-reported history of judgments. At this point, I would rest on the report and of course, we have members of the teams available for any questions. Questions for Attorney Cramer commissioners of the state or do we want to, if we have questions, do we want to hold to a G on suitability? Yeah, and we think that's how we've been doing it. Historically, I was going to hold mine until we get back to G. I think it makes sense given that we have RSM meeting tomorrow and Kathleen, you're available later in the day. Yes, of course. Thank you. All right, commissioners, then we'll turn to RSM and I will make a little introduction for RSM. RSM is one of the leading providers of audit, tax and consulting services in the United States and we appreciate they've been working with the gaming commission to help us understand insights and analysis with respect to financial component of your application. So I have Connor and... Hi, Madam Chair. Good morning, so thank you. Good morning. Yeah, we already saw you earlier today, so thank you. Yep, I will go ahead and share my screen. Thanks, Connor. So hi, good morning, everyone. I'm Connor Lachlan, a director in RSM Strategic Finance and Financial Planning and Analysis Group. I have a 12 plus years of experience in finance, accounting, and investment banking. I just want to say that RSM appreciates the opportunity to present to the Massachusetts Gaming Commission. We understand the importance of the licensing process and the importance of these meetings. As commissioner, as commissioner, Judge Stein has indicated RSM team has been asked to join the meeting and make a presentation related to certain aspects of the applications. Please note RSM is not presenting on all aspects of the application. Specifically, RSM has been asked to provide insights based on our experience and research into the following specific application sections. The description of the applicant's sportsway during operation, the projected Massachusetts revenue, the applicant's financial stability and integrity to operate in the state of Massachusetts. We will also provide any general observations that we conclude may benefit the commission and their review of the applicant. The three areas RSM will speak to you today include an overview of the sports betting market Massachusetts and the US and how RSM utilized certain market data to test financial projections, applicant projected gross gaming revenue, market share, and full percentages. And finally, an analysis of the applicant's current authority position. We will reserve sections two and three for executive session. Similar to our other presentations to the commission, I'll begin by providing some insight into how third party equity analysts are estimating the current market size and hold percentage. RSM utilized market research to test the reasonableness of each category three applicants financial projections. As illustrated on slide four, we've compared the total applicant pool's estimated market share to how the market is estimating the current Massachusetts addressable OSB market in terms of gross gaming revenue. As presented, the current applicant pool is estimating that the Massachusetts market will be approximately 300 million higher in 2027. Please note that no one has a crystal ball in estimating the total opportunity for the Boston addressable online sports betting market. And the combined applicant pool estimation may very well be appropriate in Boston Massachusetts market. In addition to the market size, RSM also researched the year over year growth trends estimates as provided by Truist and Deutsche Bank market research for the state of Massachusetts in order to again test the reasonableness of each applicant's projections. The chart presented here excludes 2023 through 2024 is this estimate. This is estimated to be beyond 300% growth. Generally speaking, DraftKings growth rate for 2024 through 2027 is directly aligned with these third party estimates. Moving on to slide six and seven wants to provide some insight into the total eye gaming market share. The current US market is dominated by three major players. Fandal at 33% followed by that MGM at 21% and then by the applicant DraftKings at 19% are the top players in the United States OSP market and eye gaming market. Finally, RSM utilized information from other states and third party research developed a benchmark for whole percentage. We have deduced that a range of eight to 12% if you likely range for whole percentage in competitive states and the expected whole percentage rate expected in the state of Massachusetts. And we expect that default Massachusetts will fall on a 8% range. I will now provide a high level overview of our observations regarding the applicants financial projections. The applicant crown Massachusetts will be a local online gaming our parent company DraftKings a publicly traded company. We were provided a comprehensive view of projected operations in the Commonwealth from 2023 to 2027. We reviewed the applicants revenue projection information and prepared to market analysts which bank equity research reports and true securities. These were both gaming industry specific reports both issued in October of 2022. The revenue projection section executive maybe warranted as RSM's plan discussion is competitively sensitive information specific to crown Massachusetts estimated market share. Given the sense of nature of the information I'll provide just a high level overview of crown Massachusetts projections and reserve further sensitive information for executive session. The applicant in accordance with section C2 has submitted a financial forecast for operations within the Commonwealth. The submitted forecast takes three scenarios base case and upside case and a downside case. In each of the submitted scenarios the applicant provided a five year financial projection of sports wagering activity in Massachusetts covering estimated handle gross gaming revenue cold percentage and gaming revenue. Gaming revenue estimates have been used to independently calculate an expected market share projection based upon our market research. The applicant did not self report anticipated market share percentage capturing. At a high level the projected GGR projections and resulting market share are in line with the market share capture percent achieved by the applicant and other jurisdictions. As the commission is aware revenue is closely tied to full percentage. Crown's assumption is in line with the whole percentage one would expect in a competitive state operation. Again, due to the confidential nature of draftings projection that will reserve further commentary for executive session. With that this concludes our since public portion of our presentation. I will stay on to see if BMGC or draftings has any questions. Thank you. No questions. No questions from the drafting side at this time. We'll look forward to the discussion in the executive session. Thank you. Okay. So we talked about breaking blanch in the structure but before we do that Council Grossman, I think it would be great if you could just do a quick check in on where we are on items that we're considering for executive session. Do we all agree that we want to have Connor rejoin us on the findings? And it sounds as though the applicant would like to add in. So that makes sense. Are some of them, there was at least one other maybe potential? Yeah. So it's the in-game wager odds, the dynamic nature of them and whether they are typically consistent amongst operators. Right. Anything else so far commissioners? All right. So it is 12.02. What if we come back at 12.35 and begin our section by section review of the application? And that will follow with at least the executive session covering the two items we've identified so far. Right. Okay. Thanks everyone. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you everyone. I think we're just waiting perhaps for commissioner bills. I'm just wondering if you could perhaps reach out to point crystal to Mr. Oh, here he is. There he is. Great. Thank you. There we go. Okay. We'll get started then. This is a reconvening of a public meeting of the Massachusetts Gaming Commission. We're holding this meeting publicly. So I'll go to roll call. Good afternoon, commissioner Brian. Good afternoon. I'm here. Good afternoon, commissioner Hill. Good afternoon. I'm here. Good afternoon, commissioner Skinner. Good afternoon. And good afternoon, commissioner Maynard. Good afternoon. I'm here. Excellent. So we are now turning to item 4C on our agenda and we continue our consideration of Draft King's application for category three on Tethered Sports, Waging, Operator License. Thank you again for your presentation this morning. And now, commissioners, I suppose that we walk through the application as we have done with each application that has come before us previously. We should consider whether the applicant's response, proposal meets expectations, exceeds expectations or fails to meet expectations. Just a reminder though, in this context, since we have to consider the applications holistically at the conclusion of this individual review, which we are anticipating to be later in the month, this initial assessment as to whether the expectations have been met will be preliminary in nature. Just to see whether we have a general consensus and is subject to modification once we have a chance to move through our evaluations of each application and the broader landscape is in greater focus. We have preserved flexibility in this process. A reminder of one or more commissioners may seek supplemental information from the applicant to any component of their application. Then as part of this process, again, as we have done before, we should consider any conditions that we might like to see in the event that a license is awarded to this applicant. And as I just referenced, at the end of the process on or about the 18th and 19th, we should identify any variation between the applicant's proposal in this category as it relates to others. So at this juncture, we will turn to section B of the application. Do we have questions commissioners for the applicant? Madam Chair, I can start off, and this is in no way to take away from your record on responsible gaming, which we'll get you later and there's a lot of positive to talk about. But in some of the examples that you put in B and you talk about your promos and stuff, almost all of them say free bets. And so I'm wondering if you guys could address sort of the trend in some of the regulations that are coming, eliminating that phrase and how you would adjust some of those. Can I ask that seminar chief marketing officer to answer that question? Yes, thank you. So we certainly have used that phrase in marketing. We're consistently evaluating the language that we use and will always be fully in compliance with any regulations set forth by the commission. So do you have any plans at the moment to move away from that phrase? Absent regulatory mandates? From the phrase, a free bet? Free bets. We at this point, we in certain jurisdictions have a specifics to the marketing across jurisdictions. We can follow up with specifics as it relates to how we promote free bets across the various jurisdictions. So I read that that you've done changes in certain jurisdictions already or you're working on it? It varies based on jurisdiction and we comply with all the terms required. For example, if something is required to be a free bet, the promotion is a truly free bet without any other actions needed for the consumer. Got it, okay. And then just housekeeping because I asked this question of an applicant the other day but I believe the answer to this is you have done this already. And I wanted to thank you for it that you have in fact already registered and paid the taxes on the DFS portion of the business for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. That's correct, Mr. O'Brien, we have. Great, thank you. Mr. O'Brien, I'll go on next then. I think it'd be really helpful for me to learn a little bit more about a partnership you have perhaps mainly because I'm wondering if they're not unique across the industry and then also how you navigate any potential, if any, conflicts. I think I understand that you have an exclusive betting agreement for the USA, the Ultimate Fighting Championship which is a mixed martial arts league. And with what I assume is the athlete, Conor McGregor, I'm wondering if you could elaborate on that because it seems to me these partnerships might be common given the threat of sports and athletes' interests. And Mr. McGregor, I assume it's still active as a competitive athlete. Yes, happy to answer this one as well. So we do have an active relationship with the UFC as well as active relationships with some MMA fighters. And these deals have been formed through partnership with the sports governing body in all cases. And the governing bodies were also approved, part of and involved in approving the promotional messages across whether the UFC or the fighters as well. And similarly, we also have deals with professional sports teams to promote our brand as do other operators in the space as well. And what about the individual athlete? Is like Conor McGregor, do you have an audience name with him too? Yes, we have active relationships with MMA fighters specific to Conor McGregor. We have in the past, I mean, specifics regarding the deal terms. Happy to share more, would request that that be part of the executive session in terms of specifics of the partnership. That seems to me to be a question for Mr. Grossman. I'm not necessarily looking for the terms of the deal, just if whether those arrangements occur and then if it is something that could be discussed publicly and perhaps some, I'm thinking if it was an attorney in the room, are there guardrails set up to manage potential conflicts? Hi, Chair Judstine. I think any specifics as to the contract that we have with Mr. McGregor would be appropriate for executive session as to the actual relationship and what he does. As part of that, Steph can speak to that. Yes, in 2022, we did, we work with Conor McGregor specifically to do social posts primarily promoting DraftKings as well as a few other current MMA fighters as well. So Chair, this is helpful for us really as a comparison. So thank you, and Mr. Hill, I'll turn it to you. So let me see if I can ask it in a different way. I brought this up a couple of days ago with another applicant where I'm starting to see a lot of partnerships between sports betting companies and individual athletes. And I think, Madam Chair, you asked specifically what guardrails or what potential guardrails being put into place to ensure the integrity of sports betting and these athletes as well as the sports that they represent. This is all relatively new and these partnerships are relatively new but they're starting to pop up almost everywhere that we see a sports betting company doing some advertising. It's worrisome to a regulator, quite frankly to see how close an athlete is to a company and to the sport they represent. So the specific question is what guardrails are being put into place to ensure the integrity of not only your company, the athlete and the sport that they represent. Right, and to be clear, I want to be clear that my position is that I'm imagining this can be managed. And I know that Commissioner Hill's establishing concerns so but I guess we would like to understand it. Thank you. Thank you. And Jake List, who is our Senior Director of Regulatory Operations, he can speak to that and the integrity concerns that you're raising in connection with these partnerships. His computer's crashed. Okay, and I apologize but I was just told that his computer just died. So he'll be rejoining in a second. At a high level, we have these partnerships in place, we work with the leads to ensure that there's lists sharing between operators and leads to identify prohibited players that are not able to wager on our platforms that are participants in the contests. We work with outside groups, integrity monitors to assist with that process as well as our regulatory partners such as if we're fortunate enough to be selected to participate in the commonwealth EMGC. So there's a few redundancies whether we work with the leads themselves, the commissioners, the regulators as well as outside third party integrity monitors to ensure that these athlete participants are not able to wager on the platform because they are prohibited better. So can I do a follow up, Commissioner Hill? And this is really helpful and I'm gonna really Google Mr. McGregor after this. I'm a little bit embarrassed, I'm not familiar with him as an athlete. So my apologies, MMA is on my adult children's lips and not crying right now. But are you saying that your concern is just with respect to Mr. McGregor betting on himself as opposed to where there's a partnership you offering betting on a lead in which he participates? Do you have any restrictions on that? So thank you, Madam Chair. I think it's more holistically, it's not specific to a Conor McGregor relationship it would be with any relationship we enter into. I think that a way to kind of look at it that may be helpful is not only do we have these, Conor McGregor is an example of a relationship with an athlete in a combat sport, it's an individual sport, but we have a relationship with the parent company UFC. We have relationships with all of the leads and a lot of the, I guess the downstream, ensuring integrity comes from those relationships with the leads. So we ensure integrity by working with our league partners if there are other specific individual athlete examples that you have, I none come to my mind, I apologize. But in that instance, Conor McGregor, who I believe may be retired at this point. That's what I wondered. Yeah, but he was fighting a couple of years ago, but we do have a relationship with the UFC and we work with them. So if he's not fighting, it's not as relevant, perhaps to our discussion, but if you had that one, and then I don't mean to pick on an individual athlete versus another, but just in the application. You know, an active athlete, what I'm hearing is that the guardrails really are reserved the integrity as to the athlete so that he or she can't bet on their events. But I don't see, I'm not hearing anything that suggests that other regulators require for their restrictions. Well, certain leads, and I see that Jake was able to reboot his computer, so he is the subject matter expert, I'll turn it over to him in a second, but certain leads do not allow us to enter into relationships with active athletes. NBA, NFL, MLB, UFC was unique in that regard, but Jake, if you want to jump in. Yeah, I mean, I guess I would cite as another example with all sorts of sponsored the golfer, Bryson Deshenbaugh, in conjunction with the PGA. As far as regulatory requirements, yes, they are focused on preventing athletes themselves from betting and we ingest this professional athletes to make sure those people locked correctly for those purposes. There can also be additional requirements, like in terms of licensing for brand sponsors. So essentially like an athlete or a league, if the relationship that we've formed with them is as a marketing vendor, sometimes that does undergo additional due diligence, which has happened in a few states in respect of these partnerships. Thank you. I think we got a little sense of the landscape. I appreciate it very much. Other questions, commissioners? So I'd have follow-up sort of in that regard, in terms of, and this some kind, again, we can maybe reserve this for responsible gaming, but some of those relationships to the extent they're allowed are professional, celebrity endorsements or spokespeople. Do you have a vetting process in terms of looking not only at what their sort of official body of work is, but any other conduct that could reflect on the company? Steph, is that something you work with? Yeah, so Stephanie Sherman, CMO, so with regards to a marketing process around partnerships, individuals, companies, vendors that we work with, we do have a process and partnership with a variety of different organizations within the company to help that do relevant checks, depending on the type of partnership, in addition to what Jake was referencing in terms of a regulatory and compliance and more thorough vendor registration or partnership process. So yes, in terms of a process that encompasses beyond the strict regulatory compliance components, but also from a marketing standpoint, partner suitability. Okay, so that's sort of cross division assessment. That's right. Other questions on section B? I have another one, but I wanna yield to my fellow commissioners if they have something. I do, but I yield to any of the others who haven't asked anything yet. Madam Chair. Yes. So this comes up in B. There's a significant amount of users in the Commonwealth that you already have signed up. I don't know if the number is public, so I'm not gonna give it. But how did you acquire those users? Are they people who are in other states? Are they, quote unquote, free play? Like, how were those acquired? Thank you, Commissioner Maynard. I would ask that any discussion specific to number of customers in the Commonwealth be reserved for executive session. We have offered daily fantasy sports in the Commonwealth, which we developed a customer base in that regard. We also have Massachusetts residents that have signed up for our sports book in other jurisdictions, such as New Hampshire, where we operate. So those are two examples of how we built a database in the Commonwealth to date. We, to get in front of one of the questions that we've done and we submitted some information on this, we've done no pre-launch marketing specific to the Commonwealth to this point, and are awaiting guidance from the commission if that is permitted. So none of our customer database accumulation has been in connection with OSB, Massachusetts, specific marketing. Thank you. Does that answer, or would you need more information to an executive session? Nope, that answers the question. Great, I'll set them. Commissioner O'Brien, do you wanna go ahead? Sure. So it's page 60 on the full-out PDF. I believe B3A, one of the answers in B3A. You have a chart that sort of looks at the satisfaction rate of some of the services, different categories. You break it down, I believe from 2020. If everybody has that in front of them. Sorry. Okay, that's a B3A, SB satisfaction, is that the chart you're referring to? Right, yep. So my question is the most satisfaction is found for the promos and the offers types of vets, logging in, stability of the site, that sort of thing. The bottom, once you passed the 50%, I was looking at, was there a consistent theme at the bottom? And from the bottom, it says researching wagers, checking stats, signing up registration, options for withdrawing, options for depositing, speed of withdrawal. We're sort of in descending order from lowest and up. So I'm wondering if you can speak to what, if anything, you've done since 2020 to address that cluster that's down in sort of the 30% or low 30s. Sure, yeah, I'll have Jeremy speak at a high level to some of the features that are available in the sports book that you may address those specific sections of the, and anything specific that isn't public, we just ask that that piece potentially be brought to executive session, but at a high level, Jeremy can give a response. And thank you for the question, Commissioner O'Brien. I'm just looking at the slide now to answer your question. If this was dated in 2020, that was nearly two years ago now for our platform. So the addressable market and the available jurisdictions where our product was offered was very limited. And at the time our technology stack was still evolving in terms of the gaming sector itself. So as you saw in the technology slide I provided earlier today, we've added numerous identity verification providers, payment methods to our player account management system to give our customers as many options as possible, not only for the ease of deposit and withdrawal, but also on the registration component, making sure we have multiple vendors in place to positively resolve the PII they're submitting to us for that ease of registration. And in 2020, again, just due to the addressable market in terms of our size and available jurisdictions to operate in and the breadth of providers and vendors we were using at that time, that's what corresponds to that satisfaction survey. I'd like to think now if we were to survey our customers in all the jurisdictions we're operating in, you'd see the inverse of that graph and you would see a much more positive experience in terms of registration, depositing, withdrawal and the overall experience in terms of onboarding. Okay. Because the dissatisfaction or lack of satisfaction sort of the money transfer part of it was what struck me the most. That seemed to be the most consistent cluster at the bottom. Yes, and that goes to in our financial platform team which has done a lot of important work over the last several years to onboard additional payment vendors for both money on and money off purposes has really improved that experience because we did hear our customers loud and clear through not only surveys such as that but also just through direct contact with our customers and our CEX team to know exactly what they were looking for and what provided the best experience. And of course, all of these vendors have gone through suitability and licensing in each of the jurisdiction that we offer them. Okay. Thank you. I'd like to just follow up on the issue around your promotion approach and marketing promotions. I noted in section, I don't know precisely which I'm sorry to say which section, subsection of section B but that since 2018, you've given almost a way and it's a large figure and I don't know if it's public or not but I can say millions and free to play offers and that you've had a very high retention rate and I think you're contributing the investment in retention. But one of the, I'm sure that you've probably been listening to a couple of our meetings and well before even sports wagering was legalized, we were concerned about the frequency and intensity of the arts and marketing and I know that's a new challenge. Over 10 years, everything evolves and we're learning that can have an impact on players. So I've noted the tension before. I'm wondering, I feel like your business model really depends still on that approach where I wonder if you're starting to think for new innovations on how we can shift from that approach somewhat, that will still work for your business model and also start to address that issue. And I think also just sustainability as a component of your business model. So I don't know who wants to address that. Thank you, churches. Any, I just asked that any specific draftings related approach to marketing, we would ask that it be reserved for executive session as proprietary. Steph can speak to high level thoughts on marketing and long-term sustainability of the industry. Yeah, absolutely. So I'll start by saying that we're very much focused and understand the concerns shared in prior sessions around frequency, saturation, intensity of marketing and advertising. I would say to your question around how we're thinking about other ways to ultimately have a relationship with our consumers and marketing. It is very much a focus on our brand as a trusted brand and what Jeremy has taken through as it relates to an extremely strong product. As we know that that is critical to retaining our customers as well as a trusted brand. In regards to the tension that you referenced, it is absolutely a focus of all of our marketing strategy conversations that balance of ensuring we can promote awareness of our brand as a regulated operator as now if approved sports-mediting not only just DFS and again, aligning that with the interest and high demand consumer time frames and balancing that with the considerations and concerns on volume and frequency. And so critical to doing that and for DraftKings to remain a trusted leader in the space, really finding that balance when we think about the who, the audience and full compliance and aligning with the law as the jurisdiction, the what, the messaging, the offering, making sure it's clear, well understood and the where and when really making sure that it's relevant and contextual to an audience that is interested in seeing our advertising in the right moment. So really all of that sort of collective as part of the ecosystem of operators, media networks at the national and local level and leagues will continue to learn and evolve with the industry. And again, to the concerns we take our role in this as a leader in this space very seriously and are committed to making sure that we're delivering as a trusted leader and brand in this space. Thank you very much. Other questions? I don't know whether it comes here whether Krishna Hill was gonna get to it later. He usually asked about the customer service access and that I'm just curious about and maybe I missed it but when you went through sort of the demo and the slides I was curious as to what is the process if somebody has not sort of an account betting question but maybe a question about if I think somebody's hacked into their account or they've lost control of the account how does that work? Sure, thank you commissioner, Brian. I'll pass it to Paul Lieberman. One of our co-founders to talk through RCX and just general outreach questions. Sure, thank you for the question, commissioner Brian. So the contact us and support page that's on DraftKings is available whether you're logged in or logged out of your account. We have channels such as live chat on the platform as well as we respond actively to social channels you know, IE Twitter, Reddit, Facebook, et cetera. If somebody reaches out to support at DraftKings.com with an account question we route it based on the severity of the type of category. So an account compromised email would get the highest severity and would get the fastest attention because we know that in those cases quick response is really important. So that is the way we deal with it we have a triage step that happens and then our customer service agents reply back. The other thing that we actively do is make sure that we are, for example in the account compromised situation we are alerting customers with emails making it easy for them to reset their password and self-service in the event that there is an account compromised. So relying on a customer service inquiry but letting them self-service as quickly as possible to protect their account. I have another question that I probably think is best for executive session, but I'll raise it here now. And it's in the similar vein of, if I heard you correctly, one of the protections that you put in is to not be able to withdraw monies to an unknown account. And so I know there have been some issues of late with maybe some data breach with third party or that sort of thing. So I'm curious as to how those two reconcile. I'm assuming that's an executive session topic but I did wanna ask the question. Commissioner O'Brien, thank you. We would ask that that be reserved for executive session given that it addresses our cybersecurity and there's proprietary information. So we'd be happy to discuss an executive session. All right. I think that was a comment on mine. So thank you, Commissioner O'Brien. Thank you. Any other questions under D? I'll take the temperature of the commission with respect to section B, do you find that the applicant has met expectations? Commissioner. Yes, Madam Chair. I do believe this applicant has met expectations for section B. Thank you. Commissioner Lee. I agree. Thank you, Commissioner Skinner. We also agree. Right. Commissioner O'Brien. I agree other than the question that I just asked. I think they've met attention. Thank you. I'll move on to section C. Questions. I can start, Madam Chair. Thank you. And I will start with a bit of a kudos. A plus on your brick and mortar and employment presence in the Commonwealth. A plus on your community engagement. You highlighted your work with some important causes and organizations, one of which I personal experience with. One thing that I know is not spoken to in the application is your plans relative to the lottery in the Commonwealth. You do mention New Hampshire and Oregon and the partnerships that you've developed there, but hoping you can elaborate on what your plans are, what you see as your plan for Massachusetts. Thank you, Commissioner Skinner. Staff, if you want to just speak to that high level. Yeah, absolutely. We do not have any business agreements with the Massachusetts Lottery today, but our very open to conversations are on ways that we could work together. We do have strong partnerships with lotteries in other states. And given we are a local company with very strong brand recognition, we think that could present some really interesting opportunities for us to work together in the future. Follow on, Commissioner Skinner. I have to say that following up, I noted on this page 409 that you had a page showing where evidence, where sports betting is introduced to a state where there is a lottery, that there's evidence that it's not negatively impacting the lottery to have sports wagering. And I hadn't ever seen that. We work affirmatively to ensure that gaming and expanded gaming and sports wagering doesn't cannibalize the lottery, but that was a really good page. So thank you. I think I'll send it to the church. It's very good. Questions? Under Section C? Madam Chair. Yes. During the presentation, the applicant stated there would be between 75 and 80 new employees in the Commonwealth in the written materials, approximately 25 new roles in the Commonwealth. There was like an asterisk at the end of that. And I just wondered, is the discrepancy that 25 are going to be related to the sports wagering in Massachusetts only? And the additional just comes from the growth. You're unique, right? You're based here. So I understand that there's some growth that's unrelated to the Commonwealth, but I wanted to see what the discrepancy was there. Yes, second answer. This is Graham. Commissioner Maynard, you're exactly correct in the application. We stated 25 roles. Those are 25 roles directly associated with the, you know, should we get approved the us offering sports betting in Massachusetts and having to be staffed up for that? The 75 to 85 is inclusive of those 25. And it also includes our overall growth projections given our headquarters is here in Boston. That's what I thought, but thank you for clarifying. So I had a question on 410, 411, Section C5, Community Engagement. I think it's subsection C, the promoting of local businesses, restaurants, hotels, et cetera. And you talk about how you give, you sort of can boost them incidentally by giving your employees, you know, access to the gym and things like that, which is great. And then you sort of get a broad stroke reference to helping other local businesses, restaurants, et cetera by partnerships. You didn't give any specific examples in there of having done that, you know, events or restaurants, driving foot traffic, that you give like a general reference to it on 411 at the bottom of that. So I'm just wondering if you could give a couple of specific examples. Absolutely. One of the examples, I'm sorry, this is just jumping right in. I just asked Commissioner O'Brien that any specific plans to partnerships, potentially in the Commonwealth, would that be reserved for, that are not announced, that that be reserved for an executive session? Yeah, I wasn't actually asking about future because I figured you might say that, but having had a presence with the DFS market for a while and it was written, I thought in the past tense as if this has been done, or maybe not, maybe it's all prospective and maybe they asked the answer to my question. Is at this point with DFS and your presence here, have you not done that and all the plans are prospective? I mean, I'll give you an example of one of the partnerships we do have locally with Boston Wall Black, for example, with Daily Fantasy Sports. We do have a very specific partnership with them where we're able to provide with a code that we've given them. I think it's a dollar per every entry fee associated with the entry fee code that we've provided to our partnership with Boston Wall Black. So that as a professional organization and a partnership that we work with very closely and something that's local where we provide proceeds due to DFS. I'm not sure if that's like the type of partnership you're looking for or? Yeah, and if you had anything and now going prospectively and if you wanna reserve that for executive session because it's not public, I'm curious if you have any other specifics in mind if you were to be awarded a license. I can jump in. If we were to be awarded a license, absolutely as we think about from a marketing strategy standpoint, that is inclusive of our go-to-market plan, whether that be for example, launch parties or the like. And in addition, certainly not in a prospective manner as we think about the events that we host as a team as well as locally from a marketing standpoint. So looking forward if we were to be awarded physical presence partnership with local businesses, restaurants in context of events is absolutely a part of our look forward plan. And then the mission. So go ahead. I apologize, just another high-level example of another jurisdiction that may help just kind of not specific to the Commonwealth but how we look at potentially doing other things as we have a relationship in Michigan with a branded Draft King Sport and Social restaurant hard type area. So we do work with local businesses that are existing to come up with potential partnerships in the jurisdictions where we operate. That's just one example of in a different jurisdiction. So that kind of segues into my follow-up question which was on subsection D about live entertainment venues and the promotion of that. And you talk about the sweet hosting within Boston sporting events. I didn't know if there was anything other than that. We've had some other applicants talk about hosting over 21 entertainment venues to try to drive up foot traffic visibility for some local venues and businesses. I wonder if you can speak to those plans either here or an executive session. Mr. Irvine, if we could reserve that for executive session to speak to the perspective plans beyond and we'll let that out. We'd appreciate that. Yeah, thank you. I could just follow up because I've noted this in a few other public meetings. I do see opportunity for impact besides marketing on when you go into the neighborhoods and work with the local establishments will help perhaps with respect to people could be targeting the establishments who perhaps think about minority owned businesses women owned businesses. There's an opportunity there. There's also an opportunity with the lottery at those local establishments because of the keynote. So there's again, if you find that that's part of your marketing strategy to go into the neighborhoods in those local establishments just several benefits that could come out. Understood, thank you. Okay, other questions on C. I guess one thing I noted which was different than the lottery you noted that you're anticipating or perhaps this might be reserved executive session, I'll be careful. How I guess I'm looking at the impact of introducing sports wagering on your daily tennis sports. Is that something that you don't wish to speak about in the public, is that? That's correct, Chair Judd Stein. And if we could reserve that for executive session we'd appreciate that. Okay, thank you. Other questions? All right, I want to echo my fellow commissioner Skinner's initial remarks. I too thought that this section had a lot of great qualities in particularly with respect to the community engagement piece, Commissioner Skinner is not spot on. So taking the temperature of the commission on section C. Commissioner Skinner? I don't have any section C expectations, Chair. Thank you. Commissioner Hill or Commissioner Maynard? This is Commissioner Hill and I believe the applicant has met expectations for section C. Thank you, Commissioner Maynard. I agree. Commissioner Hill. Okay, we'll set them to move on to section B, please. Questions? I was struck by the gender number to be perfectly blunt. You've got some great numbers in some other categories but I'd love you to speak to the low number on your female representation. Absolutely. So I believe you were referring to the primary of 26.6 percent representation of women company-wide. I'd say there's a handful of things that I would call out. One, this is a significant focus for us in a large area of investment. I think we've made progress over the period of time that we've focused in this area. But just to be blunt, I think that there are a series of headwinds in our industry and with the type of workforce that we recruit for, mainly the available market for tech employees given we're a tech-oriented company where others might have the benefit of having more of a land-based presence. So for us, we are not where we want to be, to be frank with you. And I think that's why we've focused so much not just on improving our overall demographics which I would say have improved but not quite to the point that we want them. Obviously that's why we wanna get it up to a higher percentage over our long-term perspective but also because we've spent so much time dedicating to investment in career progression, internally coaching mentorship and benefits that women are interested in. So again, I think that there's a combination of things based on talent availability that I think make it somewhat difficult but I don't think that's an excuse. I think we can continue to do better here and we'll look to do that as we go forward. Yeah, I mean, because while I hear you in terms of a percentage of women maybe in the tech field, the upside to being in Massachusetts is there's a plethora of universities to choose from and try to get women who are in tech and computers and into the field and into job opportunities. So I would hope to see something specific particularly tying back into the employment opportunities in C which there is no other applicant who's gonna be able to match that number who's gonna be in front of us. I'd love to see that gender number get up with some more pointed efforts in that regard. Yes, absolutely. And we'll look to continue to showcase that to the commission as we go forward if we are selected. Thank you. And I would echo that. I do think that it's interesting that other applicants are facing the same challenge and the numbers are different. I applaud you for really being frank and humble in saying that you've got some work to do. And that's fair. And to the extent that we're in any way sparking that, you know, we accept that responsibility and look forward to, you know, continue conversation should you be awarded all of that. But there's a lot of opportunity for this. And again, and we do appreciate too the commitment you're making to women and STEM. So thank you. Commissioner Maynard. I just wanted to take this as an opportunity to say that the STEM council is very active in the Massachusetts. It's under the executive office of education and they have an executive director. And I'm sure that those folks would appreciate outreach and, you know, anything that could move the ball forward. You know, there are a lot of state resources. Absolutely. Thank you, Commissioner. Madam Chair, I had the same concern as Commissioner O'Brien and I was just about to say the same thing, Commissioner Maynard. Here in Massachusetts, the STEM council and STEM in general is like a top priority from the governor's office all the way down to our local school districts. So it's absolutely something I would recommend that you reach out to. And I think that will be very helpful in getting your numbers up. Absolutely. Thank you for the suggestion. Madam Chair, I need a bit of clarification. I'm looking at one of the responses to section D. It is on page 424 of the PDF document. And it is section D1D. There's a list of stacks. It says female 827 employees. Is that correct? Because, and I'm just working with raw numbers here, I believe your total workforce is just above 1,300. And so what's that 827 number because that seems to be far above the 23%. I believe that that 827 must be out of our global number and not out of our Massachusetts number. I see. Okay. It would not make sense. Commissioner Skinner, this is Commissioner Hill. I think I saw in the presentation, it was 1,300 Massachusetts employees, but globally there's 4,000. And I think that number that you're looking at represents the 4,000, not the 1,300. Yeah, okay. And I did see the reference in the presentation and just made a note to ask about that because I was unclear at least. So thank you. And just as a follow-up, we often get breakdowns of stats within up the C-suite and the management level. So do you have any further breakdown on the stats put out in this, in that regard? Yes, give me one, no, wait. Give me one second. No, go ahead. Oh, okay. Sorry. I will give me one second here and I will tell you. So for our overall, are you saying with respect to gender, the overall stats commissioner? I'm curious about all of them. Unless I missed it, I didn't see a breakdown in the stats that you gave. You didn't miss it. Correct, I'm happy to share. So for our vice presidents and above, they are 22% female. For levels between manager and senior director, it is 28% female and for all employees, it is 27%. And then what about the minority numbers, the diverse minority numbers? So I have, I'll tell you the total. This also takes out no responses. So there's a category for no responses, which are not included in the total. So just know that. For our level for vice presidents and above, it is 13% BIPOC for between manager and senior director, it is 17% and then for all employees, it is 31%. Can I also W, because I didn't know that in my notes, I'm not sure if I read it in terms of the level of directors for the parent company. What is the makeup of that? I'm sorry, I missed the question, Madam Commissioner. Of your parent company, the board, do you have a female representation and diverse, I believe about that, but forgive me. So for the board of directors, three out of the 11 members are diverse and then the number of the stats I am reporting on really are for our total company. So we don't have like a parent company structure. This is including the specifics that I gave you were focused on either our global numbers or sorry, our Massachusetts numbers specifically, but I'm happy to give breakdowns on different demographics to the extent, or different locations to the extent you want them. So you don't have it on the parent. I mean, these are- We only have the three. Were there up to three? I thought that was maybe on the parent company was three minority, but I wasn't sure, or diverse, that's how it was framed. I wasn't sure if that was inclusive of women or- Yes. Yes, there are three women on the board of directors out of 11 board directors members to which are black. Thank you. So that's a good start. Right? Thank you. And I don't need to go through each individual board, but the point is of course, just starting at the top and as to work through the organization. So thank you. Absolutely. I'm noticing Ms. Accus, I have been in your shoes where you were at your first meeting and you watched your homework laid out to you. So it's a very exciting opportunity. Any other questions? Any other questions under section C? Adi, I'm sorry. Just a comment, I don't think it's a surprise that this is an area that I care very deeply about as do my fellow commissioners. Mr. Robbins and Mr. Liebetman, I want to congratulate you on representing the Commonwealth very nicely in this area, notwithstanding the added focus that's needed around women representation. And I believe that you will continue to excel in your work and with Ms. Accus on board, I wish you continued success. Thank you very much, Commissioner Skinner. If I could also just close on this. I just want to note that Jason did have to drop off earlier. So just in case for future questions, Mr. Robbins is no longer on the Zoom, but Mr. Liebetman is here. And I'm probably stealing a little bit of Commissioner Hill's thunder when I say this, but going through the supplier spend and the diversity spend, I was struck by your commitment to veterans and support for veterans. And I was really impressed with the breadth of charities, the amount of money that went into it. What I'd love to see going forward when we've looked at some of your areas that are in need of work, the money spent on some of those areas doesn't match. So I would love to see some of that money going forward, start to trend in that same direction, because it's laudable, the efforts, the number and the money that's going into the veteran services. Thank you, I understand. Any other questions under D? Ms. Scherz, did this applicant meet expectations here? I'm sorry, before we do that, Madam Chair, were there goals listed? I know we've asked other, it's that question. I didn't see any goals. I did see an acknowledgement, however, to establish goals on the diversity spend. This is Graham again. There were goals on the last slide, so not in the application, but in the slides that we presented. There were goals one, and I'm happy to repeat them just so that you have them, on in terms of employment diversity, a goal of 35% women globally by 2025, a goal of 40% BIPOC in the US, that's the only place we measure it by 2025, and then on supplier diversity. I think this is an area of focus for us, where our goal for this year is better tracking and benchmarking data, and that's really where we want to focus on the vendor and supplier side. For, to the time we're up to now, we've relied on self-reporting, which I don't think gets us a full perspective on our vendors and suppliers. So we'd like to get a better understanding of the suppliers themselves, so we can appropriately set goals. So, there was no goal set in the application or in the presentation, and I know that that was something that's been addressed here. So commissioners, how would you like to address it? Commissioner Maynard? I, you know, we've been very clear about wanting to see something. And, you know, we have been, obviously you're not the first applicant that's come in and had a problem with where it stands as today, right? Like where you are on supplier spin. So I understand that piece, but most have been willing to go ahead and attach a percentage to where they want to be. I mean, I don't see any downside in asking for that because, you know, you may find when you do your research that you're there at the goal, right? Or you may find that you need a little more, but I think to be consistent, that's something that I would have to see. Just to follow up on that, I think overall spend would be helpful for context. Okay, go ahead. I was gonna say, to the extent that we've been able to track the spend, what we've seen is over 1.5 million in spend that's been identified. I'll say that that is likely under-accounting the actual spend given there's a lot that flows through different channels. Although we're happy to look at how we can set an appropriate target and goal for going forward. And I think that being something that we're looking into actively and understand, you know, the commission's concern and commissioner Maynard, you know, we'd be happy to continue to work with the gaming commission on an ongoing basis. Should we be selected for a category three license to address this issue? So can I ask a follow up question? You said you don't track outside the US. Can I ask other legal impediments to that or is that a corporate decision? We do not track for people of color in countries where it's less relevant. So diversity in Ukraine, for example, is a much different thing that is in the US. So self-identification of those types of things is something where we track very closely within the US and is different within each of the countries. Gender is one where we do ask for self-reporting globally, although the market is different in each of the markets within which we operate. Okay, thank you. So just I wanna be very clear for the applicant, commissioners, you would like to see at least some kind of a goal to work from, to be consistent with what we've expected from other applicants, so. I think so, I think that's what we asked of other applicants, right? Yes. Okay, well, it sounds as though you've got some information there to make some decent assumptions. So that's a great start. And of course, you know that within state government, there are some really great resources for you to access OSD, this is just a great area for your growth, you know, so consistent with what's the other priorities, so. Absolutely. Thank you. Great, so with that, understanding that we'll probably just move that at some kind of a condition. How do we feel about the applicants meeting the expectations here? Madam Chair, I would point out that, you know, we will not take a final vote today. If information came to us before the final vote, I would not make it a condition or I would not ask for it to be, but otherwise I believe they met expectations for this section. Thank you for the clarifier. There's an opportunity for any information that we raise for you to come back to us with no connection with our 18th and 19th. So very good clarifier. Thank you, Commissioner Maynard. Others, in terms of how they feel about this, and Commissioner Maynard. I believe this section meets expectations. Excellent, Commissioner Hill. I agree. Okay, and Commissioner Bryan. I agree. Okay, great, well done. We're going to move on to then section E, please. Responsible for any questions? I had a question. And again, maybe I missed this. We've had a lot of these, but some of the other applicants have talked about having baked in one of the, an RG feature is an app limit, being able to set a time. I know you said it'll kick you out after a certain period of time of inactivity, but do you have on there the ability, already or the ability to put in if someone wants to select a max amount of time on a given day on your app? Yes, we do. That was covered as, sorry, thank you for the question, Commissioner says, Jeremy again. Yes, we do offer a time limit that was shown as part of the, in the slides and the demonstration that's offered in all of our jurisdictions and users are able to set that at a per hour basis per day. So they can set it between one and 23 hours. And if they've maxed that, if they've been on the platform for a cumulative of one, anywhere between one and that 23 hour period, we track that throughout the day. And if they meet that period, we then forcefully log them out and they're not allowed to log back in until a 24 hour period has passed. Okay, great. And then I think in E1E, you've got a section that talks about affordability, determining affordability on large deposits. And I'm just wondering if you can go in any more detail about that. Yeah, I can speak to that. Thank you for the question. So working through both with our numerous identity verification providers and internal controls that we have between our responsible gaming team and our CX team when a user is going to request a deposit limit increase to ensure that they're able to support that play. There is a series of suitability checks that are conducted. Both the customers asked to provide a bank statement to show an active balance in their account. Oftentimes we'll ask for a pay stub in order to make sure they can maintain or support the play in which they're intending to their requesting. And then there's also using again, our providers that we use for identity verification, we were able to look at property records, vehicle records and have deterministic logic in place to assess if this individual is of a net worth and or income that is viable for the request that their deposit increase that they are requesting. And is that done continually or is that you do a check? And if they clear it they're put in a VIP category or something and you don't circle back or is this like a constant check? It is done continuously at each time a user would request to increase their deposit limit. So if they request to increase it and the assessment has been made that they are viable and they are suitable to have that increase completed if they come back in X amount of time whether that's 30, 60, 90 days requesting yet another increase a suitability check will be further made in a I think a higher degree of an assessment is made at that point just to ensure the user can sustain that type of play. So as the user requests to continuously increase there are gradual checks in place to ensure that we're not going to introduce any at-risk behavior and or make them at risk to themselves. So in that initial assessment is there any look at maybe they can do it right now but if they're going to repeatedly do this every 30 days for a year now they're going to be at risk but they're not upping their limit. Is that assessment rolled into that? Commissioner O'Brien, I just asked that as we drill down on the specifics of the process given that it is somewhat proprietary could we discuss that in the teaching session? Thank you. Yep. Okay. Turn to another question and go back to you Commissioner O'Brien just to see. Yes. Okay. Commissioner Skinner or Commissioner Hill and Commissioner Maynard? Questions on the responsible gaming section just for the public's purpose the document itself was over 700 pages and while there was maybe one line in the CIVIT most of its content so it was a very thorough report. Thank you for that. I have a question that may just allow commissioners to really get your notes but this actually which O'Brien can remind me maybe Commissioner Hill remembers too but the issue has come up somewhat in the gaming context but at one point I think I saw that there might be limits as to the withdrawals and that I guess I would like to say can you confirm that if I had a quarter left in my account that I'd be able to withdraw it or is there some maximum that it's required or if it's a penny even? Can I get? Yes. So by payment method there are restrictions but if you did have say a quarter in your account or a penny you would just simply have to contact our customer service team and a withdrawal could be processed for that and that's just due to certain restrictions with payment providers and vendors in terms of amounts that can be processed as a refund but we're always able to refund any remaining balance in a player account. And so there's just a little friction they've got to do an extra step but I understand it's a third party concern so are there questions? Commissioner O'Brien back to you. I did and I'm sure we're all asking about this and maybe we were reserving it for suitability and executive session but I did want to ask about the launch in Ohio, what went wrong, what steps you've learned, what's gonna happen in terms of if you get a license in Massachusetts. Thank you for that question Commissioner O'Brien. That is something that we would like to reserve for executive session given that it's a pending matter but we'd be happy to discuss an executive session. And then I guess that maybe we should just pause because we paused just for one second. Commissioner I just want to get my notes and then also I just want to make a pause to just see if Councillor Burson is able to keep up. Are you all set? Did you want? Yeah, I'm just, no I'm keeping up. There's of course at the conclusion of section E, Commissioner O'Brien is noting that there's a chart there. Yep. So I want to make sure all the commissioners have the opportunity to look at that. So we go through this in an organized fashion and really just select those items that are really important as we analyze this section of this application. So Commissioner O'Brien has noted a recent issue in Ohio, I don't know what page it's on Todd. Let me see if I can find it. Just scroll right here. And we'll all be careful how we frame it because of sensitivities. Chair Judson, just to jump in momentarily, I believe a chart was just referenced. We're looking at the same time. I believe if it's the chart we're looking at, we would ask that anything that's disclosed in that chart be reserved for executive session. Can you help me out? Do you know what page it's on? Can you tell? 496. 496? Thank you, it's all helpful. Okay, so and so I'm gonna let that get sorted out with Councilor Grossman as we, if we identify something, let's see if we can do it in a proper fashion. So 496. And then. I don't see that Ohio matter. I have a question. On the chart. Oh, one second, please. Do you don't see it's not in the... It wouldn't have been. I didn't grab it on the chart. It was after they submitted, so it wouldn't be on the chart. Right. That's correct. It's relative to the compliance. But that there isn't a chart that I've assumed Commissioner O'Brien was turning to it because that's right at the conclusion of Section 8. Oh my gosh. So, let's be how we loaded. 497, I think on our staffs. All right. Thank you. My apologies. All right. So. So, Madam Chair. Oh, actually. Yes. Somebody else asked for, if you have questions there. If you ask for. Thank you. I just have a clarifying question. Is the applicant able to speak to items that involve the ultimate parent company? That's what I'm having trouble. Yeah. So I can address that. All of the issues that we're speaking to ultimately are connected with our ultimate parent company. We have a state or an entity that was formed for purposes of applying for this license, which is Crown MA Gaming LLC. But when we answer these questions and when we had these conversations, it all relates to the operation of the parent company. Okay. Mrs. Skinner, you can, I think that you probably have some latitude there though and to try out. If you do have questions, go out. I think I just asked one earlier on the composition of the board. So, so looking at the art and without disclosing details, but giving some kind of identifying information, is there anything that you particularly want to hear from, hear about? So Madam Chair. I'll hold until we get to section G because I think the items that I meant the item, the other item on this list, that I'm interested in is referenced in the IAB report. Okay, we'll do that then if it's just in the IAB. Go ahead, Commissioner Hill. Madam Chair, there's a couple on that list that I would like a little bit more information about how you would like me to identify that would be a question that I have for Attorney Grossman. Yesterday we had a list and we counted down the list and we just said number two, number four, number five. And I don't know if we want to do that today or not. All right. I think it, Commissioner Hill, if you have the list in front of you, if you can just identify the page and then we can count down. There aren't too, there are many on any page. We're looking at 497, 498 to 499 I think. I'm actually looking on page 503. What goes all the way. And so this applicant can speak to all of the entities under that umbrella. Is, am I understanding that correctly? Cause that makes a difference for me. That's correct. The only other question I have is some of these may in fact be public. So after we identify, I think we do have to figure out whether any of them are in fact public. That's the process we're going to go through. So this is what I ask. I'm going to start with Commissioner Hill. If you can tell me the ones that you would like to hear from. And I think it's probably okay. Would it be okay to the applicant if Commissioner Hill identifies the state or the jurisdiction for starters? And that's on 503. Chair Jensson, if it is possible to reference a page number and the row, that would be our preference. Okay. That's fine. So 503, there's one, two, three items. So all three. Cause they all, they all are similar. Yeah. And it has to do with responsible gaming. So yeah, I mean. We're trying to give us a little until, until we decide that we need, that we can talk about how likely Commissioner Hill is, we made one. Yeah. Thank you. I believe, you know, our position on those matters would be that we'd ask that they be reserved for executive session, just given that we would be getting into specifics around our processes. And those are competitive, resensitive, whatever comes out of any of those matters. So we do believe that they're more appropriately discussed the specifics of any incident or more appropriately discussed in the executive session. But if we're having to come up with the public session, if the commission and attorney Grossman don't believe that that fits the exemption, but that's our thought process with these matters being appropriate for executive session. Madam Chair and commissioners, it may be helpful just to jump in and talk a little bit about the process we've used, I believe successfully to this point to evaluate and review these types of issues. It seems to me that, and I'm just looking at the three that Commissioner Hill has just identified. These are all matters before a public body. I haven't researched them independently, so I'm not entirely sure, but it seems as though they may have been in the public ether, the fact that there was an incident and that it was resolved. And I'm not talking about the specifics or defenses or anything along those lines. But the better practice, instead of just going into executive session and sorting it out there, is to ask the applicant to discuss as much about the particular incident as they can do publicly and then see if there are any further questions that result from that discussion. And that's what we've done, of course, a number of times at this point. And in many cases, there are no further questions. So we didn't have to go into executive session. And that is the more sound approach rather than just pointing to the ones we're interested in and going in and learning about them completely. That said, if the applicant is making certain representations as to the nature of the matter itself and suggesting that the entire process was done under seal or behind closed doors and none of it was public, then we can rely on that and talk about it in executive session. But it doesn't seem to me on the face of these that that would be the case. And to respond to the existence of the matters, you're correct that they may be publicly disclosed, but the processes and the steps that DraftKings took in connection with those to remediate those we believe would be, those specific facts would be appropriate for an executive session conversation. The existence of the matter, again, if I'm looking at the right page and we're aligned in the numbers, yes, that is public, but the actual remediation steps and the facts around the resolution of those matters I do not believe are public. With that, Madam Chair, I would suggest that we just go through them. We ask the applicant to discuss as much as they can, and then we will go from there. So we've identified a Bible 3, 3 of them. So the applicant could share with us the details that you understand are public and show us rather than us initiating, it would be helpful if you set up the parameters. So what I can provide is the description of the issue. I believe that we're, are we looking at the chart that the first regulatory agencies the State of New Jersey Office of the Attorney General Department of Law and Public Safety, Division of Gaming Enforcement, is that the chart we're looking at? Yes. So in the first instance, where they did the notice of, from the regulatory agency was February 12th, 2021, Dracking's was fine for sending emails, push notifications and text messages to patrons who had self excluded or cooled off between October of 2020 and November of 2020. Any specific remediation efforts and connection with that incident, we'd ask that the matter be referred to Executive Session. Would you like me to keep going down the list? Is that? Why don't we do that and then I'll, we'll circle back to Trey Grussman. Sure. Thank you. So the second item listed on that page from the same regulatory agent agency and Dracking's entity happened in March of 2021. And we received a $10,000 fine from the New Jersey DGE in regards to sending direct mail to patrons on the statewide exclusion list. Again, I'd ask that the specifics around that particular matter and remediation is taken in the subjective Executive Session this guy. Okay. The last one. And the last one on this page is in connection with our Indiana license holder for online sports vet and crown IN gaming LLC in the regulatory agency, the Indiana Gaming Commission. We received a total $6,000 in fines from the IGC for sending direct mail to patrons on the statewide exclusion list for failing to submit the licensing paperwork for a new member of the board of directors within a set period of time and for failing to disclose certain information in connection with licensed employees. Again, specifics beyond that, I would request that the discussion take place in Executive Session. Also Grossman, how do you want to follow up on that? We'll just take those three now. I see I muted myself, so you wouldn't hear me type out. If that's the totality of the publicly available information on these three matters, then certainly it's okay to discuss the rest in public. If there are no writings or decisions from any of these regulatory bodies that describe these matters further, then we can certainly talk about them in Executive Session. I believe that there, with those specific instances that there is nothing else in the public. That's the basis of the request. But that's why we're requesting it. I do not believe beyond what was provided is in the public sector. Reminder, should we come clear that it was in the public sector, we could correct that, correct, we would come out and clarify that on the record. That's Attorney Grossman, but I understand that the presumption is that we're going in on matters that are not in the public sphere. These are difficult conversations, particularly with companies like yourself. This is the world that we regulate in Massachusetts in the public subject to the open meeting months. So if you're all set on that, Commissioner Hill, can I go to another commissioner right now? And- Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you. And another commissioner, do you have your favorite three at all? Commissioner Skinner. I have two. Okay. The first one appears on page 502 and it's the very first row. So why don't we turn, that's the only one on that page? It's the only one on that page. The other one also concerns a failure to report type matter. And it's- 505. It's it's on page 505. Yeah. So let's 502 first commissioner and it's the first one you said? Yes. Okay. Yeah. I have, I believe that the matter listed on 502 is that Commissioner Skinner, is that the regulatory agencies, the Illinois Gaming Board? Yes. Right. I believe that this matter is in the public record. I can speak to the description if you'd like or we can just answer any specific, or we can attempt to answer any specific questions you may have. No, please speak generally. Sure. Jake Wisp, are you still on the call? Sure, I am, yeah. This is the one related to Illinois, yes? Yes. Yeah. Yeah. So, sorry, I'm just getting the sheet up in front of me. Yeah, sorry, I've read the intro there. Sorry, I mean, being frank, this was a misstep from Draw of Kings. So this did occur quite some time ago and with substantially, I guess, increase in experience and both the size of our regulatory and licensing team since then. And it's all the type of thing that we, I guess, will consider that we're having ongoing issues with. I was a bit unclear what you just reported. Sorry. Jake, do you wanna speak to the high-level facts of that? Yeah. So, I'll read what's in the disclosure. So the company of Draw of Kings was flying $15,000 for failure to timely disclose to the Illinois government. The company entering into a binding letter of intent with Northside Entertainment Holdings. This is an entity affiliated with the Chicago Cubs where the company had entered into the letter of intent on August 28, 2020 and disclosed the letter of intent to the IGV on September 2nd, 2020, the day before the company issued press release regarding the relationship. So there's a rule in the state of Illinois for us to promptly report to the commission agreements of this nature. And it was deemed by the IGV that based on the facts of the situation that we didn't report it as promptly as was the expectation of the regulation. And this is something that, yeah, that's feedback that we took on board and we haven't had any sort of similar missteps following that. Let me draw back entity or that specific issue in particular, your meaning, right? Yeah, I mean, in terms of reporting things that would require reporting, you know, in a timely interest, timely and transparent manner. What protocols had you put in place to ensure that you wouldn't encounter this issue again? I mean, this type of agreement, I guess, is not something that would be super, super regularly coming up, but we do have internal processes in place. To make sure that if we are making important business agreements that they're raised appropriately to commissions. And we have dedicated licensing and regulatory operations team whose role it is to make sure that these notifications are done in a compliant manner. And on the five or five? Yeah, it's the first row there. This is Jen Aguir from the Chief Compliance Officer of Gapping. This was purely a administrative issue where we sent out notifications to all of the jurisdictions and this just happened to be missed within their, their allotted timeframe. It was, it was subsequently sent to them, but it was a matter of being a day late because it was just missed in the initial list. And page 504, that first row involves the Indiana Gaming Commission. Page 504. Which number? This one was, we had a new, this was Jenny Gargan. This was where we were just literally a day late on, or a couple of days late on a new board member and submitting their license application or a portion of their license application into Indiana. It was within a matter of days that it was late during the holiday and it was subsequently submitted. Okay. And I have to ask again, I'm not sure I got a satisfactory response the first time I asked that, what protocols have you put in place to ensure the timely filing of required notices and agreements and the like? Commissioner Skinner, that's the type of information that we believe is more appropriate for an executive session discussion is speaking to business decisions or modifications that we've made as a result of any of these incidents. And speaking generally at a high level, as the company has grown, as the market has matured, you have learnings in building processes, which as Jake mentioned, we've done as we've entered more markets and grown as a company, but those specifics we'd be happy to discuss further in executive session. Thank you. I'd be interested in that. Madam Chair, I have just one more item. Thank you. It's on page 505. It's the very last row. It involves the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement. So Commissioner Skinner, Madam Chair, this is in connection with the regulatory agencies, the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement, our licensed entity that holds our New Jersey license, Crown NG, NJ Gaming Inc. received a, agreed to pay a $150,000 civil penalty to the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement in connection with proxy wagering by one of our customers. The specifics of that incident and the remediation efforts taken from that, we do believe is more appropriately discussed in executive session. I'd be interested in that, of course, deferring to Council President. Yeah, I think that's a widely reported matter. I mean, I'd have to check that. I think the facts of that matter are fairly well known. The stipulation of settlement to my knowledge that's in the public ether, while there may have been media coverage and speculation around the facts of the incident, the stipulation of settlement that stemmed from that incident does not contain any of the details. There's a public step and then a separate document. That's the basis of my request. I believe that those specifics are not in the public ether. And we can also confirm that as well, but that is my understanding. Thank you. Mr. Maynard, do you have any from that chart that you would like to hear? I'd like my fellow commissioners have exhausted any questions that I would have. Thank you, Commissioner O'Brien. The only other one on that list would be page 506. Second from the bottom, June 30th of last year. So that is in connection with the regulatory agency was the alcohol and gaming commission of Ontario. That is in connection with our license holder in the province of Ontario. We received a fine totaling $65,000 Canadian dollars in connection with television and social media ads featuring a specific odds offer. Jake, Liz, again, this is something that we do believe can be spoke about in the public. So Jake, I'll turn it over to you. Thanks, Chris. I mean, at a high level, there was a compliance issue related to an odds boost promotion that we ran and that was classified as an inducement. I would similarly request that we did take remediations perhaps in conjunction with this issue, but for a more detailed description, which is not in the settlement notice, we'd be happy to discuss it in the executive session. I do think at a high level, just to speak to some of the facts around that that have been reported. So this is in connection with a new market launching. This came shortly after or right around the time that the Ontario market opened up. Ontario has restrictions around offers that can be made to customers. In this specific instance, we believed that the regulatory body had a third party that they were working with that we submitted the promotion to for review that indicated that the promotion would be acceptable within the scope of the regulations. Subsequent to us actually using the promotion, the AGCO, the actual regulator of gaming in Ontario notified us that it was not permitted. That finds in connection with that offer as well as some depictions that are advertising social media posts had where in the background, there were images of our mobile application behind what I believe is coming soon messaging or just launched messaging that had the word free on the app or was it part of the offer? That's what we were. So those two, and I just think that that's an example just to speak to at a high level of a new market launching and while, again, this is a nation industry and we've grown in each jurisdiction we operate in, there are growing pains and learning lessons that we work through with our regulatory bodies and those issues have not arisen again. But I do think it's important to call out that that was in the very early day or days of the market going live. Thank you. Any other from that chart? Okay, that's that. So, Tony Grossman, I think that we've learned that they feel that they've shared what they understand to be in the public sphere and you have that list and we'll turn to that at the end of our evaluation before we go into the next session. Should we decide to? Okay, commissioners, now let's say end of section E of the naming that includes that compliance piece. So, Madam Chair, before we close out and take readings, I did just wanna, I asked Fandall this question so I wanna ask DraftKings this question which is just relating back to the settlements in New York and Massachusetts from back in 2017, I think it was. If you wanted to make any comment in this forum on that. Yes, Commissioner O'Brien, I'd be happy to handle that. I'm Stanton Dodge, I'm the Chief Legal Officer at DraftKings. Also born in Massachusetts, like so many people grew up in Marblehead and attended Suffolk Law School. And for the record, I still live for all Boston teams including all the various colleges. But I was actually not here at the time of those investigations in settlements. But one thing I did want to mention is I joined in 2017 and part of the reason I decided to join DraftKings was based on the way they handled those investigations and others around that time regarding daily fantasy sports. I very much respected and commended the company for their culture of compliance and wanting to deal with these inquiries directly and collaborate with the regulators including then General Healy, now Governor in Massachusetts. And I want to echo the sentiments I think Mr. Janeski made from Fanduul that Massachusetts took a very proactive approach which we cooperated with to actually really come up with a framework that ended up regulating that industry. And we were very proud to have participated in that. And I think Massachusetts should be very proud because they really established the regulatory framework that has been adopted more or less throughout the rest of the country. Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you. Okay, with respect to section E, as I mentioned I thought that the section was very strong. You know, we constructed the end on the compliance piece and given the extent of your business, the number of jurisdictions that you're involved with, you don't want to overstate. And I think one thing was noted, the growing pains as you come on to a new jurisdiction should you do so in Massachusetts. You know, the good news is that there's already been a lot of less inspired. So the fact that we're going over to some of these today in a second session will still be helpful for the future of us. All right, so the rest of section E might have the fact that we'll get some of these matters resolved in the executive session. Do we find that it meets expectations? I think I'd like to wait until the executive session has been completed before we do E. If that's all right, Madam Chair. Okay. Do we agree with that? I agree with that. I thought your caveat made that clear, but I'm happy to wait until I give an opinion about whether it meets expectations. Okay. I think I was also just reminding us that there was a lot of work in addition to this piece. And I thought it was so well done. You know, you have your responsible gaming work well developed. Okay. Then we will turn to section F, which is parking section being pretty straightforward. We have the proprietary platforms with respect to geo-fencing, knowing your customer, technical expertise, anything on those, on that section. The only questions I had relate back to data breaches, which I think we're going to be discussing in executive session. Yeah, so we believe that's more appropriate for an executive session conversation. Commissioner? Commissioner O'Brien with that, do you, with that set aside, do you feel this meets expectations? Aside from that question, yes, I do. Thank you. Commissioner Hill? I agree. Thank you, Commissioner Skinner. As do I. Okay, Commissioner Maynard. As do I. Okay. So we're all set and we will move on to section D. Okay. Both addresses, some of this will be addressed in the executive session with RSM and the ability for the applicant to address the financial stability matters. And then there's a continuing compliance section because it incorporates suitability, a relative suitability review under the IEB submitted. Just a reminder that it's a preliminary suitability that has been addressed in this with this phase. And in the attorney creamer, you went through the process that was performed in conjunction with your report. So, questions? So Madam Chair, I had a list based on some of their SEC filings, some of which may overlap with some of the litigation that's referenced in the IEB report. So what I can do is give the page reference to the topic and they can say whether they can discuss it publicly or whether that would be added to the list. Okay, that makes sense. Thanks. I believe see the 571, 572 in the SEC filing from June 30th of 22, there was a class action about deceptive bonuses. I think that harkens back to pre the regulations, is that correct for DFS? Yes, if it's the multi-district litigation that ultimately ended up in Massachusetts, yes, it does. That's what, okay, I just wanted to make sure that's what that was. And then there are some patent cases that are referenced in here. The one I would be most interested in hearing about is the shareholder derivation suit about the Hindenburg report, the SBT tech acquisition. Sure, and if, you know, happy to answer that with publicly available information now and then if you have further questions, maybe take it to executive session. That would be great. Okay, so just generally I'd say just a little bit of background about the Hindenburg report. One, those allegations relate to a company called SBTech that we acquired back in 2020. The allegations are made by a short seller that I've just paused to note has actually an incentive to drive our share price down. While we're continuing to look into the allegations of that report, they all concern the historical practices of SBTech before DraftKings acquired them. And more specifically in April of last year and prior, and I related to the Hindenburg report, we decided to exit the Asia reseller business of SBTech that was really the focus of the Hindenburg report and that termination became effective on July of 2021. So as a result of that report, and it's actually, it's not uncommon, the SEC has decided to investigate the allegations in that report, that investigation is ongoing and we are cooperating with the SEC in that. They've been seeking documents related to the allegations in the Hindenburg report as well as certain compliance policies and procedures. And we are continuing at this point to provide documents to the SEC and cooperate with that inquiry. So in that, that set of circumstances led to a securities class action being filed or several actually, they were all consolidated in the Southern District of New York, I believe. And actually we filed a motion to dismiss that case that actually was granted just yesterday. So the case has been dismissed with prejudice. That said, the plaintiffs certainly have a right to appeal for motions to reconsideration with the district court. And also related to that, there were several derivative cases filed that have been consolidated, one federal court case in Nevada, one state court case in Nevada. And those cases have all been stayed pending resolution of the motion to dismiss in the Southern District of New York, which as I said was granted in our favor yesterday. So we'll be looking at the next steps in those derivative cases as a result of the motion to dismiss being granted. Okay, that satisfies me. I don't know if anyone else wanted more than that. Well, good. No? The next matter was at page 579 of the PDF, which is referencing audits by Wisconsin and New York for sales and tax use. I apologize, commissioner second. Can you just give us our commissioner Brian? One second. Commissioner Brian, while we're looking into that specific instance, if the commission so desires moving on to any other issues and we can come back to this response. I think it was on page 624. There's a reference to, you talk about less formal business models in connection with SBT. I think you said sort of a caption ends and then right before the second caption begins, you make that phrase reference. I was just curious if you could explain that phrase to me. In that context. Again, please, commissioner. Yeah, it's page 624. Okay. There's sort of the end of a caption at the top of it and then before the second caption begins. So I do, commissioner O'Brien, I believe on this matter, our preference would be that this be discussed in executive session because it ties into the country broader. Yes, thank you. Okay. Yep. Okay. Sorry, commissioner O'Brien, I'm on to page 624. I just want to make sure I understand the issue you're inquiring about. They make reference to suitability reviews. They talk about risks and things like that and they talk about SBT. Sorry, it was the last caption on the page. It says SBT has historically relied on a less formal financing reporting system and has only begun integrating a group wide consistent for natural reporting system. I was just curious, less formal, I mean, is it resolved? But it sounds like that's something they would want to discuss in executive session. Yes. I think it pertains to your question on Wisconsin and New York. Yes. We have ongoing audits with those two states as it pertains to historical periods and DFS activity in those states and you need state tax laws in both those jurisdictions. That's what those two are. Thank you. So other commissioners, well, commissioner O'Brien, are all, my others are sort of the engine media, patent infringement case from 2022 and then I think there were some clarifications that they want to make in regard to some of the references in the suitability report, which I don't know whether they want to talk about that publicly or whether that in and of itself, they want to reserve for executive session. And I specifically referring to the followup letter that they submitted to us most recently. Before we turn to that letter, so were you referring to the 11-22-22 matter when you said, when you mentioned breach, is that the one, 11-22? I have a question as to whether there's two because I thought there was a November reference and a most recently a December reference. But December one, is there a breach or maybe we're saying the same word that would be what, December 19th? Does somebody, is the December notice harkening back to November 19th or do we have two separate episodes is a question I have? I have a question too. So I don't know if that's public, fair information, but those would do that if I should understand. I apologize. If I am following the question, I think it's all related to that incident in connection with cyber security. So we believe given that it impacts our business practices, cyber security of the platforms, holistically it's more appropriate for executive session. Commissioner O'Brien, I missed which patent case to which you referred. Sure, it was in the IB report in the list, I think it's number seven on the list of page 14. Number six. Is it engine media? Six and seven. Six and seven, yeah. Oh, for the cash out functionality. Okay, so on that one, we have filed in a partase reviews on all, or there's a patents at issue all relating to various forms of cash out, alleged inventions. We filed IPRs which are inter partase reviews you might be familiar with which are petitions you can file at the patent trademark office in order to determine the validity of the patents not necessarily whether you infringe or not. We are about to file the eighth one soon on the eighth patent, but we also filed a motion to dismiss in that case that was granted in part and denied in part. So the case remains pending. Okay. Yes, and I believe that there were two items in the IEV report that you just mentioned that we did respond and seek to correct. The first is on the top of page five. Hopefully these page numbers are accurate where adjusted EBITDA is calculated. And first off, you can see that the depreciation and amortization row was left blank. We certainly have had depreciation and amortization. So that just looks like a mathematical error. And then other one-time and non-cash items that we would include. So we do publicly report adjusted EBITDA. And so it is more in the tune of negative 676 for 2021 negative 392 for 2020. So just wanted to call out the, what an apparent calculation error for the adjusted EBITDA on that section. And then this is a bit more technical and probably not that important, but as it pertains to their calculation of the debt to equity ratio due to the nature of how our company and other companies like us calculate total liabilities, player liabilities that match player assets are included in the liability section. So it looks like they use CAPIQ, which is a very public and well-used source for debt to equity ratios. And we would just suggest not including those player liabilities in the calculation of the debt to equity ratio. And I can address those two points as RSM provided those two, those exhibits in the IED report. Yeah, we were going to mention this in executive session when we went through it. I think we can put it to your phone if you want. Okay, that's fine. Okay, so we've got those. And then I just on the page 14, I'm assuming that there was a correction there about page 14, page, I'm assuming that's executive session discussion. The website references. Yeah. Hello. That's the... I think that's... Your letter, I think sought to clarify that or give. The first item in your letter. Yeah. Correct. Those two matters that were cited, we have no knowledge of those issues. So that was what we wanted to call out is if there's further information that the commission wants to share and we can investigate, but upon investigation we have not found anything in connection with those two. Okay, I was going to ask if you knew, I mean, because of the similarities in some of the verbiage, whether there was concern or any information you wanted to share with us in executive session. Beyond us just not being aware of those, I don't believe there's anything further to share. Okay. You know, I think I had informal counsel on that from a member of our team. Mills, this is on the item I brought up. It's in the IEV report. The language is such that it could, should somebody pick that report up down the road, it could look derogatory. And I'm not sure if it in fact is. So IEV, perhaps we asked you to look at that item on page 12 that's referenced in the first paragraph and we get some clarity and then work with the applicant because it in fact, it doesn't have any meaning it probably shouldn't be included. So I had shared too, is it from a corporate integrity standpoint or a brand issue whether the applicant had any concerns or was taking any action? Well, and there's that too, right? I think that it probably came up to them through this report. Right, exactly. Exactly. That's correct, Madam Chair. And we are continuing to investigate, but to this point, we have not uncovered any information in connection with those issues and we're not aware of anything. Yeah, so we should align on that and if need be amend our report. Okay. Attorney Cameron, are you following because we're talking a little bit of code here? Yes, yes, Madam Chair, I am following. I think, I know that I think Mike Banks and Kevin Murphy are on the call right now, but as it was relayed in the report, this was simply a tool that the contract investigators used. It's a software that aggregates data. They simply put in what they found on that particular website and they didn't do any independent verification. So they would not be able to speak to whether or not there is any veracity to those two particular items on page 14. If they were doing a full suitability, of course they would have used this as a starting point, but given the parameters for this report, it was simply reporting to the commission what was found in that particular site. Would it be possible to do a little bit of follow up on this to the extent that we could learn something more? I only asked him because I was advised literally in the hallway that this is of some kind of explanation for it because I asked. So to the extent that it's resolved in advance of a full investigation pursuant to the suitability review, we'll work with the applicant. Is that fair? Yes. And it may be that the advice I received isn't really grounded either, so we'll figure. Okay, thank you. Other items? I just want to make sure that on the list is the issue that it was public and that was the account breach. That in December. That is all about this. Was it incorrect? From the applicant perspective, yes, we would appreciate the opportunity to discuss that in the executive set. And because I would be looking just for, simply the remedial steps you're taking from the mediation, so. All right. I'm sorry, Madam Chair, which account breach are you referring to here? Well, you know, I can't be more exact because in this instance, I did not write down the page number. I did, it must be in the report, the suitability report, but it's the player account. Thank you. Page 13, there's a reference to it on page 13 and the suitability report number one. Thank you very much, Mr. O'Brien. Oh, there's also item number two, right after that was also of interest to me. Commissioner O'Brien, that's in connection with what Mr. Dodge spoke to earlier. He just spoke about, okay. Yes. Okay, thank you. So, Todd, if you were going to find the last number, it was in fact number, the second number one. Yes, I have it. Thank you. Thank you. Anything else? I do have something Madam Chair and I am trying my best to follow along after an already long day and week, but I believe the only item not covered by Commissioner O'Brien in the IAB report pertains to items four and five on page 14. Commissioner Skinner, I believe that that was in connection with Daily Fantasy Sports. Yes, I'm correct. Mr. Dodge spoke to that earlier. He provided a response to that question, I believe. That was in connection with Daily Fantasy Sports activities. But I don't know if there's a specific follow-up question. No, if I could have a quick refresher. Again, I'm doing my best to follow along here. Yes. Happy to give a thumbnail sketch for public information, Commissioner Skinner. So this was, as sometimes happens, way back in 2015 when attorneys general, such as General Healy started to look at Daily Fantasy Sports in its legality. There were tens of copycat kind of litigations around the country jumping on that alleging that Daily Fantasy Sports was not permissible. They're all consolidated into one case in Massachusetts. And quite frankly, never really went anywhere. And we were able to settle those for a very non-material amount last year. Okay. This is the Attorney General's settlement that is talking about. No, this would be private consumer class actions. There were a number of them, father on the country, all consolidated in the district of Massachusetts. Then as I said, never really went anywhere. I think people filed the cases hoping something might come with them, but we ended up selling them for very material amount last year. Okay. Thank you. I'm sorry. I missed your first presentation. I did not get into that level of detail. So no, no problem. Anything else on compliance and section G that we need to discuss in the executive session? All right. It's out there, right? So commissioners, am I right that you would want to wait a minute and wait till we get to the executive session? No, I don't. I did not get into that level of detail. So no, no problem. I'll wait a minute and wait till we get to the executive session before we see if we have a consensus here. Okay. So Todd, commissioners, I know it has been a very long day. I'm, but I am hoping that we can of course get through today. Do the, the next steps, but I want to offer any kind of a short break. Do we need that? Or should we file ahead? File ahead. I see commissioner Skinner. No, that was for the break. Sorry. You know, I have to say that I was like, okay. All right. So maybe that'll give you a chance, Todd, to, to get your notes together. It is. Two 47. And. When we return. The commission will decide whether or not to move into executive session. I think you can probably contemplate that. And then after that executive session, the commission would return for a short, a short, short stint to public session, I believe that was for those who are not. We're watching that would be what we imagine the rest of the day would look like. Okay. Does that make sense? Everybody. Okay. Okay. We'll return it. Great. Thank you. Thank you very much. Okay, Dave. Thank you. Okay. I think we've got everybody now. I'm holding this meeting. I'm here. I'm here. I'm here. I'm back. I'm here. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner. I'm here. All right. So now. Todd, what I suggest out of this being efficient is that you just go through the topics and. And let me know the. Subsections that apply. And then we'll. Work toward getting to the second session. Does that make sense? Yes. And again to the thank you so much. Okay. So I have 12 items on the list. It'll be a bit of a walk down memory lane from today. So let me try to get this. As precise as possible. The first item on the list. The second item on the list is. You'll recall the issue that we're in game wagers, which are referred to as tier two sports wagers under chapter 23 and where the odds are dynamic. The applicant will be asked to discuss whether the odds for such wagers tend to be consistent amongst operators. That's the first issue. Number two. The applicant and RSM will be asked to discuss specific information related to financial figures and projections and the overall financial stability of the subject applicant. And as applicable, the methodologies employed to arrive at these figures in the following areas. Revenue projections. Market share percentages and forecasts. Handle and hold percentage projections. The liquidity of the applicant and any information associated with those subject matters. Also. And related to these issues. RSM and Mr. Park. May be asked to further clarify the calculations relative to the adjusted beta. And the debt to equity ratios. Number three. It's, it was noted that available funds. On a player account can only be transferred to an account that has been previously used to fund a player account. Number four. The applicant will be asked to discuss is the relates to the protocols. For the transfer of those available funds to patrons. Number four. The applicant will be asked to describe plans to hold live events in Massachusetts to promote the business if it is awarded a license here. Number five. The applicant will be asked to discuss the anticipated impact on financial transactions. Number six. The fantasy sports operation in Massachusetts. It's awarded. Number six. The process. The applicant will be asked to discuss the process for managing high risk financial transactions. And specifically how it's determined what level to play. What levels of play will be permitted and whether to, and how to increase such. And how it relates to the compliance issues associated with the launch of the draft King's product in the state of Ohio. Number eight relates to. The series of compliance matters that were described. On the chart in the application. And we just went through them, but I'll just kind of walk through them really quickly. Number five. Number five. Number three. There are two instances where there were emails. That were. Apparently improperly sent within the state of New Jersey. The question specifically that the applicant will be asked to address is the remediation efforts. That have been applied to ensure that those types of instances are not repeated. And that the applicant will be asked to address any remediation efforts that have been put in place. And offered an opportunity to provide any non-public information that could be useful in understanding those particular matters. Also on page three, there's an Indiana matter reference that we talked about relative to exclusion list mailings. And to the timely notice to the regulator of a new board member. And the non-public information might be useful in understanding those matters. On page 504, there's a matter out of the state of Indiana that's discussed. Relative to the untimely filing of notice. And the applicant will be asked again to provide. The commission with any protocols that have been put in place to ensure again that all such notices are timely filed. Moving forward, and of course, allowed an opportunity to provide any non-public information that might be useful in understanding that matter. And then on page 505 of the report, there is the New Jersey matter involving the proxy wagering. And the applicant will be asked to discuss the particulars of the settlement of that matter. And again, any remediation efforts that came from it. And again, allowed to discuss any non-public information that might be helpful for the commission to gain a full understanding of that matter. Those were all the compliance matters that I noted. There were a series of others that were discussed. I believe they were all appeared to be, I should say, described to the satisfaction of the commission. So certainly if there are other matters to add to that list, we can. Moving on to issue number nine. And I believe commissioner, Brian, you were asking about this. I just, I didn't take a notice to whether you were satisfied with the answer. And this one pertain to information relative to the Wisconsin and New York sales and use tax audits. I know they did offer an explanation. Yeah. No, I was satisfied with that answer. Okay. So we can remove that. So the next one then is a discussion of SBT's financial reporting system and the overall characterization that used as less formal and the description of that matter. For the commission. The, I guess the last. Issue. Is on, and I'm sorry, I didn't get to this part of my notes. I just need to pull up the IEB report. Okay. So this is on page 13 of the IEB report. And it discusses the account breaches. Okay. Oh yes. So this is relative to a 2022. Incident involving account hacks. So I think that's a good point to discuss. That matter, including any remedial action that was taken as a result. Of that episode. And again, offered an opportunity to offer any non-public information that might be useful to the commission and understanding. And I believe. That covers the list I had for executive session. If there are any others, you can go through and add those now. Council Grossman. That's a complete list. Am I right? We're dealing with. Disadvantage exception. And the cybersecurity. Yeah, I think that's right. It's almost exclusively the section. Okay. I have 23 and, but I think there may be a couple of instances again, where as you've identified where that cybersecurity. Private information. No, I don't believe there's any private personally, private information related to anybody. So commissioners as the list complete. Hearing. I'm sorry. I, I don't know. I don't know. On there. The compliance issues related to the launch of draft kings in Ohio. Yes. Okay. Great. Thanks. Okay. So we're all set commissioners. Well, in order to move, I have to read this into the record under the open meeting law. So the commission anticipates that it may meet in executive session in conjunction with its review. We now have a condolences approach to. The application in accordance with G L. Chapter 30. Section 21. Subsection A seven and G L. Chapter 23. In section six. Subsection, I to consider information submitted by the applicant. In the course of its application for an offer to license that or proprietary in which it disclosed publicly would place the applicant at a competitive advantage. And General Laws Chapter 4, Section 7, Subsection 26N, involves certain records which public disclosure is likely to jeopardize public safety or cybersecurity, but consider information submitted in the application materials related to the security or safety of persons, or buildings, structures, facilities, utilities, transportation, cybersecurity, or other infrastructure located within the Commonwealth, the disclosure of which is likely to jeopardize public safety or cybersecurity. With that, do I have a motion? Madam Chair, I move that we go into executive session on the matters listed by General Counsel Grossman and for the reasons stated just now by the Chair. Okay. Okay, any questions, edits? Commissioner Ryan? Hi. Commissioner Hill? Hi. Commissioner Skinner? Hi. Commissioner Maynard? Hi. Can I go, yes, 5-0. And so the applicant, we will be transferred into the, I think you, maybe you experienced this. You may have been the first applicant to experience what would go into a breakout room. We'll be asked to join. So look for that. And Madam Chair, we should just address whether we're coming back afterwards too. Oh, I'm very sorry. Thank you so much. Yes, it is our intention for the Gaming Commission to reconvene in the public session to address any matters that should be disclosed publicly and to adjourn. Okay. Thank you so much. Thanks, Dave. Thank you, everyone. I'm just going to note my own commissioners. Oh, she's missing again. Oh, no, there she is. There's Commissioner Ryan. I was wondering if you had some kind of a glitch in your system there. No, this morning I did, but not now. It's taken care of. It got taken care of. Excellent. Thank you. Okay. Everyone back on your team. Okay. Okay. There we go. Okay. Yes. I believe we're all back. Madam chair. Okay. Excellent. So for the public, because we're holding this meeting virtually, I'll do a quick roll call Commissioner Brian. I am here. Commissioner Hill. I'm here. I'm here. All right, we'll get started and we are meeting our public meeting that started off at 10 a.m. this morning. And as we be viewed, Master Game Commission, we viewed the application of Crown MA, Gaining LLC, we know to be trapkinks that presented their application and gave a demonstration. We had this opportunity to check in with some of our in-house experts and then review the application section by section where we raised various issues that were more properly addressed in an executive session. And we just concluded that executive session. And now the, I don't believe we have anything to report for clarifier that needed to become in the public domain from that discussion, but I did want to go over anything that was outstanding. Councillor Grossman from your perspective with respect to items that we've raised that have not yet been addressed in the executive session. I just have a couple of items on the list and they might be more long term than short term but while we're, it's all fresh. The first issue was that I believe the applicant is being asked to establish workforce and supplier diversity goals. And I think a subset of that and Commissioner Maynard, I think you may have indicated that this may not be necessary but that they also provide the overall vendor spend breakdown. But I did hear Commissioner Skinner say that she would like to see that as so much as they had it and I would join her on that. Okay. So in that case, it's that they establish workforce and supplier diversity goals as well as provide the overall vendor spend. And is that for a set period of time or as far as the spend or just moving forward. The goal would be moving forward to spend as it currently stands would be as it as it stands today. I was how I would view it is that how you view it. Commissioner Skinner. Exactly. Thank you. Understood. We can pull that. And we will be clear on the goals. Okay. Anything else on that list. I know we have to go back to a couple of our sections but I wanted to remind everyone what we may have asked for. And then they can reflect upon what we just learned. And then I think we return to sections E and G. I think the other item on the list and this I believe is more of a long term issue would be that the applicant provide any updates of material movements in the proceedings relative to the compliance matters before the Ohio casino control commission relative to their launch in that jurisdiction. And they would do that by communicating to my AB. Would that make sense commission. Okay. Thank you under understood. Thank you. Okay. Anything else that well then what I'll do is, let's reflect upon section either responsible gaming that has the compliance piece at the end. Given what we've learned in executive session. I'm going to seek a consensus. Commissioner Hill. I'm actually ready to say that both E and G have met expectations. I would agree. That's very efficient. Thank you. And I agree as well. So we have taken that temperature and the way that this works as you've heard. And so with that, we don't have any other steps to take with the applicant except to say, thank you. We're anticipating the 18th and 19th of this month. We will do a more of a comparative review. And so with that, we don't have any other steps to take with the applicant except to say, thank you. You presented a very, very thorough application. It was lengthy, but it was very content rich. And for that, we are very appreciative. You know, the fact that you are here in Boston, you've heard the commission say it's a pleasure to see that when we know that the legislature always cares about the economic engine of gaming. We're wearing that with new jobs and new revenues. We appreciate that. So I just thank you for your time today and everyone's attention. So, commissioners, I'll give you a chance to say, thank you, Commissioner, Brian. What to mute myself. I didn't realize it was unmuted. Thank you to anyone who's given us a good application organized concise as clear answers for us. It's greatly appreciated by those of us that are going through these. It's been said by a lot of my other fellow commissioners in terms of the Massachusetts presence is impressive. There are fewer areas to work on I think you heard us I would trust that if you get a license to do that in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts we would see positive trends in that regard. So thank you for your time and thank you for your presentation. Thank you Madam chair and I just want to thank you as well. Very informative and the application was very well done. Well written very precise. And I'll just share in my, my comments with Commissioner Brian. I think you heard us loud and clear. Some of the issues that we care about deeply here in Massachusetts. And that should you get a license that you would adopt. And I think that's one of the things that we have here for the things that we brought up today, but very, very well done today and I appreciate your time and all the answers up to the questions we had for you. Thank you. Mr Skinner. Thank you so very well represented in what Commissioner Brian said. And so, I want to add my thanks and want to specifically highlight your responsiveness to the, to the questions very forthcoming, very informative, and just a great presentation overall so thank you again. It's hard to, it's hard to go last or next to last. Just want to thank you. You've been an innovate innovator, a disruptor. You've been at the forefront of this field for over a decade. And I appreciated the opportunity to look over your application and appreciate your forthright answers today. And thank you madam chair thank you commissioners. We know it's been a very long process for you all and your staff over the past six months, but we do appreciate your, your thoughtful consideration of our application, and we're excited at the possibility of bringing our sports but to the Commonwealth. And if we can provide any additional information beyond what Todd reference please just just let us know and we'd be happy to do so. But but thank you all very much for your consideration. Thank you. Thank you. So, we won't keep anyone another second longer unnecessarily. I need a motion to adjourn. To adjourn. Second. Ryan. Hi, Richard Hill. Hi. Mr. Skinner. Hi. Hi. Good night. Thank you so much.